Intel Core i3-4370T vs Intel Core i7-2635QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2635QM and Intel Core i3-4370T are two end-of-life Intel processors that land remarkably close together in the database, separated by just 12 points in average benchmark score (995 versus 983). What makes this matchup unusual is that the older, mobile quad-core sweeps every recorded head-to-head test, yet the newer desktop dual-core from a more advanced architecture keeps the margins narrow enough that the choice between them depends heavily on the workload. The data shows a five-to-zero clean sweep for the i7-2635QM, with every winning margin falling between roughly 4.7 and 4.9 percent, a consistency that says more about the balance of the two designs than about dominance by either side.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear but modest winner: the Core i7-2635QM wins all five head-to-head benchmarks. If the priority is throughput in threaded rendering workloads such as Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core runs, the i7-2635QM is the pick, with margins of 4.8 to 4.9 percent in the multi-core tests. Notably, it also wins the single-core tests by 4.7 percent in both R20 and R23, which is notable given its much lower clocks, a point covered below.

The Core i3-4370T still has a case, but it rests on platform characteristics rather than benchmark scores. It sits on Intel Socket 1150, a desktop socket, whereas the i7-2635QM uses Intel BGA 1224, a soldered mobile package, meaning the i3-4370T is the only one of the pair that exists as a socketed, replaceable desktop part. It also carries PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU and documented DDR3 support with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth, connectivity details the database does not record for the i7-2635QM. Buyers who need upgradeable desktop infrastructure should weigh those factors against the small performance deficit. Neither chip is fast by modern standards: both sit in the 26th to 27th percentile versus all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

These chips come from two Intel generations and two market segments, and the differences show up throughout the spec sheet. The i7-2635QM is a Sandy Bridge design built on a 32 nm process at Intel, with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i3-4370T is a Haswell design on a 22 nm process, packing more transistors into less space: 1,400 million on a 177 mm² die.

The core topology is the sharpest divide. The i7-2635QM offers 4 cores and 8 threads, the classic Sandy Bridge quad-core arrangement with Hyper-Threading. The i3-4370T offers 2 cores and 4 threads. Clock behavior differs accordingly: the i7-2635QM runs a 2000.00 base clock with a 2.90 boost, while the i3-4370T runs a fixed 3.30 with no boost clock recorded. TDP is 45 W for the mobile part versus 35 W for the desktop part.

Cache also splits the two. Both carry 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 is 6 MB on the i7-2635QM versus 4 MB on the i3-4370T. Integrated graphics differ by generation: Intel HD 3000 on the Sandy Bridge chip versus Intel HD 4600 on the Haswell chip. Both use a dual-channel memory bus and both lack ECC support. Release dates are far apart, with the i7-2635QM recorded in January 2011 and the i3-4370T in March 2015. The i3-4370T carries a launch MSRP of $138; no comparable figure exists in the database for the i7-2635QM.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly on benchmark results, the i7-2635QM wins everywhere. It takes Cinebench R15 multi-core (301 to 287), R20 multi-core (1257 to 1199), R20 single-core (177 to 169), R23 multi-core (2995 to 2856), and R23 single-core (422 to 403). There are no recorded tests where the i3-4370T comes out ahead, so the use-case split cannot be drawn along performance lines. It has to be drawn along platform lines.

For sustained multi-threaded rendering, video encoding-style throughput, or any workload that can spread across eight threads, the i7-2635QM is the stronger recorded performer despite its lower clocks. Its percentile placement, 27 versus 26, is nearly identical, but within this pairing the quad-core consistently edges ahead.

The i3-4370T's strengths are structural. It is a Socket 1150 desktop part with documented DDR3 support, 25.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, which matters for discrete GPU installations. Its Haswell-era Intel HD 4600 graphics and 22 nm process are also the newer of the two, and its 35 W TDP is the lower figure. For a small desktop build where socketed serviceability and platform connectivity outweigh a sub-5-percent benchmark deficit, the recorded data does not disqualify it.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five head-to-head tests, with deltas of 4.7 to 4.9 percent in every one. Its average benchmark score of 995 also edges out the i3-4370T's 983.

Q: Does the higher-clocked i3-4370T win any single-core tests?

A: No. Despite its 3.30 fixed clock versus the i7's 2.90 boost, it loses Cinebench R20 single-core 169 to 177 and R23 single-core 403 to 422, both 4.7 percent deficits.

Q: How do these chips compare to the broader CPU landscape?

A: Both sit near the bottom-mid range of the database: the i7-2635QM at the 27th percentile versus all CPUs and the i3-4370T at the 26th.

Q: Which CPUs are closest rivals to each part?

A: The i7-2635QM's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-2920XM and AMD Opteron 4226 at a 0 percent delta, plus the Intel Core i3-8130U at 0.1 percent and Intel Xeon W3565 at 0.2 percent. The i3-4370T lines up with the Intel Xeon X3470 at 0 percent, the Intel Core i3-4130T and Intel Core i7-875K at -0.1 percent, and the Intel Xeon W5590 at -0.3 percent.

Q: Can either chip be overclocked?

A: No. Both have locked multipliers, so the recorded clocks are the ceilings.

Q: Which platform is more serviceable?

A: The i3-4370T uses Intel Socket 1150, a standard desktop socket. The i7-2635QM uses Intel BGA 1224, a ball-grid array soldered directly to the board, so it is not socket-replaceable.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Walking through the recorded results test by test shows a strikingly uniform pattern.

Cinebench R15 multi-core: the i7-2635QM scores 301 against 287 for the i3-4370T, a 4.9 percent win. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 1257 versus 1199, a 4.8 percent win for the same chip. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 2995 versus 2856, another 4.9 percent victory. Across three generations of Cinebench multi-core testing, the quad-core Sandy Bridge part holds an almost identical lead, indicating the gap is a stable property of the two configurations rather than a quirk of one test version.

The single-core results repeat the story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-2635QM scores 177 to the i3-4370T's 169, and in R23 single-core it scores 422 to 403, both 4.7 percent wins. This is the more analytically interesting result: a Sandy Bridge core boosting to 2.90 outperforms a Haswell core running at 3.30 in lightly threaded rendering. The database also records Geekbench results only for the i7-2635QM (1371 multi-core, 442 single-core), so no direct comparison is possible there, but the Cinebench pattern is consistent.

Geekbench data for the i7-2635QM also slots it alongside its nearest rivals, with an average score of 995 that matches the Intel Core i7-2920XM and AMD Opteron 4226 exactly. The i3-4370T's 983 average sits within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Xeon X3470, Intel Core i3-4130T, Intel Core i7-875K, and Intel Xeon W5590. The final tally: five wins for the i7-2635QM, zero for the i3-4370T.

Specification Differences

The fields where these two processors diverge:

• Cores/Threads: 4 cores, 8 threads (i7-2635QM) versus 2 cores, 4 threads (i3-4370T)
• Base Clock: 2000.00 (i7-2635QM) versus 3.30 (i3-4370T)
• Boost Clock: 2.90 on the i7-2635QM; none recorded on the i3-4370T
• TDP: 45 W versus 35 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1224 (soldered mobile) versus Intel Socket 1150 (desktop)
• Architecture/Codename: Sandy Bridge versus Haswell
• Process Node: 32 nm versus 22 nm
• Transistors: 1,160 million versus 1,400 million
• Die Size: 216 mm² versus 177 mm²
• L3 Cache: 6 MB shared versus 4 MB shared (L1 and L2 per core are identical)
• Integrated Graphics: Intel HD 3000 versus Intel HD 4600
• Market Segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release Date: January 2011 versus March 2015
• Launch MSRP: not recorded for the i7-2635QM; $138 for the i3-4370T
• Memory and PCIe: DDR3 support, 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes are recorded for the i3-4370T only; both share a dual-channel bus and no ECC

In short, the i3-4370T is the newer, more efficient, more platform-connected desktop part, while the i7-2635QM is the older, larger, more threaded mobile part that nevertheless wins every recorded benchmark in this pairing.