Intel Core i3-7100T vs Intel Core i7-3630QM Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a surprisingly layered picture. The Intel Core i7-3630QM wins five of the seven head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core i3-7100T takes two. The i7-3630QM dominates every Cinebench workload, both multi-core and single-core, with deltas between 37.2% and 37.6%. The i3-7100T counters with a decisive victory in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1111 against 633, a 43% gap, and a narrower multi-core win in Geekbench at 2230 versus 2111, a 5.3% advantage.

For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering or heavily threaded productivity, the i7-3630QM is the clear choice from the data. Its four cores and eight threads provide a substantial parallel advantage. The i3-7100T, with only two cores and four threads, cannot match that throughput. Conversely, for workloads that resemble Geekbench's single-threaded tests, the i3-7100T is the superior part, offering a massive 43% lead in that specific metric.

The database's average benchmark score places the i7-3630QM at 1289 and the i3-7100T at 1258. Their percentile rankings are nearly identical, 35th and 34th respectively. This suggests that on an overall average, the two processors are functionally equivalent. A user should choose the i7-3630QM if their primary applications scale with core count and thread count, as evidenced by the Cinebench results. A user should choose the i3-7100T if their workload is dominated by lightly threaded tasks that benefit from higher per-core performance, as shown by the Geekbench single-core score. The data does not support a universal winner, only a workload-specific one.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-3630QM has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 1289, compared to the Intel Core i3-7100T's 1258.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Geekbench?

A: The Intel Core i3-7100T leads by 43% in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1111 versus the i7-3630QM's 633.

Q: Which processor wins in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, and by how much?

A: The Intel Core i7-3630QM wins, scoring 4364 compared to the i3-7100T's 3175. This represents a 37.4% advantage.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-3630QM supports DDR3 memory, while the Intel Core i3-7100T supports DDR4 memory.

Q: What are the respective percentile rankings for these CPUs?

A: The Intel Core i7-3630QM is in the 35th percentile of all CPUs, and the Intel Core i3-7100T is in the 34th percentile.

Q: What is the difference in their TDP ratings?

A: The Intel Core i7-3630QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Core i3-7100T has a TDP of 35 watts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The Intel Core i7-3630QM is based on the Ivy Bridge architecture, built on a 22 nm process node. The Intel Core i3-7100T uses the newer Kaby Lake architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process node. This generational shift is a primary factor in their differing characteristics. The i7-3630QM is a mobile part from the Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) generation, while the i3-7100T is a desktop part from the Core i3 (Kaby Lake) generation.

The core configurations are fundamentally different. The i7-3630QM has four cores and eight threads, while the i3-7100T has two cores and four threads. The i7-3630QM also has a larger last-level cache, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the i3-7100T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Both share the same per-core L1 and L2 cache sizes, at 64 KB and 256 KB respectively.

Memory support diverges here. The i7-3630QM supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and a maximum bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The i3-7100T supports DDR4 memory, also with a dual-channel bus, but offers a higher theoretical bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. Neither processor supports ECC memory. Both have the same PCIe configuration, Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. They also both have integrated graphics, with the i7-3630QM featuring Intel HD 4000 and the i3-7100T featuring Intel HD 630. The i7-3630QM has a transistor count of 1,480 million on a die size of 160 mm², while those figures are not recorded for the i3-7100T.

Clock speeds reflect their different roles. The i7-3630QM has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The i3-7100T has a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz, but it has no boost clock listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a supported feature for either.

Specification Differences

The table below outlines the key areas where the two processors differ based on the recorded specifications.

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3630QM | Intel Core i3-7100T |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | None |

| TDP | 45 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Kaby Lake |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 3 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 | Intel HD 630 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2012-09-29 | 2017-01-02 |

| Part Number | SR0UX | SR35P |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent and large advantage for the Intel Core i7-3630QM. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 439 against the i3-7100T's 319, a 37.6% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern, with the i7-3630QM scoring 1832 versus 1333, a 37.4% delta. The R23 multi-core test continues this trend, with scores of 4364 and 3175 respectively, again a 37.4% difference. The i7-3630QM's advantage is not limited to multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 258 versus 188, a 37.2% lead. The R23 single-core test also favors the i7-3630QM, with a score of 616 against 448, a 37.5% delta. Across every Cinebench test, the i7-3630QM is ahead by a substantial margin, hovering just above 37%.

The Geekbench results tell a different story. The i3-7100T wins both tests. In Geekbench single-core, the i3-7100T scores 1111, which is 43% higher than the i7-3630QM's 633. This is the largest delta in either direction across all benchmarks. The Geekbench multi-core test is closer. The i3-7100T scores 2230, while the i7-3630QM scores 2111, a 5.3% advantage for the i3-7100T. This multi-core result is notable because it is the only multi-threaded test where the i3-7100T wins, despite having half the cores and threads of its rival. The data suggests that the i3-7100T's higher per-core performance, driven by its newer architecture and higher base clock, can partially compensate for its lower core count in certain workloads.

The average benchmark scores reflect this mixed picture. The i7-3630QM has an average score of 1289, placing it among rivals like the AMD Opteron 6272, which scores 1288, and the Intel Core i5-3570, which scores 1286. The i3-7100T's average of 1258 places it near the Intel Core i7-3615QM, which scores 1260, and the AMD Athlon 200GE, which scores 1261. These averages are close, and the percentile rankings confirm this, with the i7-3630QM at the 35th percentile and the i3-7100T at the 34th.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3630QM is the dominant processor in multi-threaded rendering workloads. The Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show it leading by more than 37%. This clear advantage makes it the preferred choice for applications that can utilize all eight threads, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation tasks. Its lead in Cinebench single-core tests is also significant, indicating that even in some lightly threaded scenarios, the older i7 can outperform the newer i3. This could be due to the i7's higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz and its larger cache hierarchy.

The Intel Core i3-7100T wins decisively in Geekbench single-core, with a 43% lead. This suggests it excels in tasks that are heavily dependent on single-thread performance, such as older games, certain office productivity applications, and software that is not well-optimized for multi-core processing. Its higher base clock of 3.40 GHz and newer Kaby Lake architecture likely contribute to this strength. The i3-7100T also wins in Geekbench multi-core, albeit by a smaller margin of 5.3%. This indicates that in some multi-threaded scenarios, the newer architecture's efficiency can offset its core deficit.

The data implies a clear trade-off. The i7-3630QM is a workhorse for parallel workloads, offering a consistent 37% performance advantage in Cinebench. The i3-7100T is a sprinter, excelling in single-threaded tasks and even holding its own in some multi-threaded tests, but it falls far behind in sustained multi-core rendering. The choice between them depends entirely on the dominant workload. The i7-3630QM is for users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput. The i3-7100T is for users whose applications favor high clock speeds and per-core efficiency.