Intel Core i3-7300 vs Intel Core i7-3612QM Comparison

The Verdict

The data shows a narrow but consistent advantage for the Intel Core i7-3612QM across every recorded benchmark. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 1.9% to 2.3%. The i7-3612QM is the better performer in both single-core and multi-core workloads, despite being an older mobile part with a lower base clock. The Intel Core i3-7300, a newer desktop chip, trails in every test but by a margin small enough that real-world differences will be subtle.

The i7-3612QM should be chosen when maximum throughput per thread count matters, as its 4 cores and 8 threads outpace the i3-7300's 2 cores and 4 threads in all multi-core tests. The i3-7300, with its higher base clock of 4.00 GHz and newer architecture, is the pick only when platform compatibility matters, as it uses a different socket and supports DDR4 memory. For users constrained to the Intel Socket G2 (988B) platform, the i7-3612QM is the clear choice. For those on Socket 1151, the i3-7300 is the only option of the two.

The percentile data reinforces this split: the i7-3612QM sits at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs, while the i3-7300 sits at the 31st. Their average benchmark scores, 1129 and 1115 respectively, differ by roughly 1.3%. The nearest rivals for the i7-3612QM include the Intel Core i5-4690T (matching its 1129 average) and the Intel Core i7-2720QM (0.1% behind). The i3-7300's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 3 1200, which matches its 1116 average, with the Intel Core i5-3550S and i3-4150 each 0.3% ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-3612QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i3-7300 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the base clock speed difference?

A: The Intel Core i3-7300 has a base clock of 4.00 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-3612QM has a base clock of 2.10 GHz. The i7-3612QM also has a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, which the i3-7300 lacks entirely.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-3612QM wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3944 versus 3856 for the i3-7300, a 2.3% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 1656 versus 1619, and in R15 multi-core, 397 versus 388.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i7-3612QM also wins every single-core test, but by slightly smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 556 versus 544 (2.2% ahead). In R20 single-core, 233 versus 228 (2.2% ahead), and in R15 single-core, 55 versus 54 (1.9% ahead).

Q: What are the socket and memory differences?

A: The Intel Core i7-3612QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B) and dual-channel memory without a listed type. The Intel Core i3-7300 uses Intel Socket 1151, supports DDR4 memory, and has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has the higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core i3-7300 has a TDP of 51 watts, while the Intel Core i7-3612QM has a TDP of 35 watts. The mobile i7-3612QM is more power-efficient despite having more cores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Core i7-3612QM is built on Ivy Bridge using a 22 nm process, with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-7300 is built on Kaby Lake using a 14 nm process, though its transistor count and die size are not recorded. The process node difference is significant: the 14 nm node is newer and denser, which typically allows for higher clock speeds at lower power per transistor, but the data shows the i3-7300 consumes more power overall.

The cache hierarchies differ in total L3 capacity. The i7-3612QM has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-7300 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The larger L3 on the i7-3612QM likely contributes to its multi-core advantage, as more cache is available for the additional threads.

Integrated graphics also differ. The i7-3612QM carries Intel HD 4000, while the i3-7300 carries Intel HD 630. No graphics benchmarks are recorded, so performance cannot be compared directly from the database. The i3-7300 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-3612QM has no PCIe data listed.

The release dates are separated by nearly five years. The i7-3612QM was released in 2012, and the i3-7300 in 2017. The i3-7300 is marked as "Active" in production status, while the i7-3612QM has no production status listed. The market segments also differ: the i7-3612QM is a mobile processor, and the i3-7300 is a desktop processor.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3612QM | Intel Core i3-7300 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.10 GHz | None |

| TDP | 35 W | 51 W |

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

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Kaby Lake |

| Generation | Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) | Core i3 (Kaby Lake) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | Not recorded |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | Not recorded | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not recorded | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

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

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Not recorded | Active |

| Release Date | 2012-04-28 | 2017-01-02 |

| Part Number | SR0MQ | SR359 |

Both processors use dual-channel memory buses, have ECC support disabled, and have locked multipliers, so these fields are not listed above.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a uniform pattern: the Intel Core i7-3612QM wins every recorded test, but the margins are tight. The largest advantage appears in multi-core tests, where the i7-3612QM's additional cores and threads provide a 2.3% edge in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-3612QM scores 397 against 388 for the i3-7300. In R20 multi-core, it scores 1656 against 1619, and in R23 multi-core, 3944 against 3856.

The single-core results follow the same pattern but with slightly smaller deltas. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i7-3612QM scores 55 versus 54, a 1.9% margin. In R20 single-core, it scores 233 versus 228, a 2.2% margin, and in R23 single-core, 556 versus 544, also 2.2%. The i3-7300's higher base clock of 4.00 GHz does not translate into a single-core win, indicating that the i7-3612QM's boost clock of 3.10 GHz, combined with its architecture, compensates for the clock deficit.

Geekbench results are recorded only for the i7-3612QM: 1691 multi-core and 501 single-core. No Geekbench scores are available for the i3-7300 in the database, so a direct comparison in that test is not possible. The overall average benchmark score for the i7-3612QM is 1129, while the i3-7300 averages 1115, a difference of 14 points.

The nearest rival data provides context. The i7-3612QM's average score of 1129 exactly matches the Intel Core i5-4690T, with the Intel Core i7-2720QM and i5-3330S each 0.1% ahead, and the i3-4370 0.1% behind. The i3-7300's average of 1115 is matched by the AMD Ryzen 3 1200 (delta 0%), while the Intel Core i5-3550S and i3-4150 are 0.3% ahead, and the Intel Core i7-5557U is 0.4% behind.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3612QM wins every recorded benchmark, so its advantages are straightforward. It leads in all multi-core tests, making it the better choice for workloads that scale with thread count, such as video rendering, compile tasks, or any parallel processing measured by Cinebench. Its single-core wins, though smaller, still give it the edge in lightly threaded applications. The 35 W TDP also makes it more suitable for power-constrained environments, as it draws less power than the i3-7300 despite delivering higher scores.

The Intel Core i3-7300 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its strengths lie outside the performance metrics. It uses the newer Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, which suggests better efficiency per clock, though the data does not show a performance benefit. Its 4.00 GHz base clock is the highest recorded between the two, but it does not result in a single-core victory. The i3-7300 supports DDR4 memory and has a stated memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, which is not recorded for the i7-3612QM. It also uses Socket 1151, a common desktop platform, and its production status is "Active," meaning it may be easier to source.

For users building a new desktop system, the i3-7300's platform advantages, including DDR4 support and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, may be decisive even though it loses every benchmark. For users with an existing Socket G2 mobile platform, the i7-3612QM is the superior performer in all recorded tests. The data does not support a scenario where the i3-7300 wins based on measured performance, but its newer platform and memory support give it a practical edge in system compatibility.