Intel Core i5-3320M vs Intel Core i5-3610ME Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Core i5-3610ME across every recorded multi-core and single-core test. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the i5-3610ME scores 230 against the i5-3320M’s 227, a delta of 1.3 percent in favor of the 3610ME. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the 3610ME posts 961 versus 948 for the 3320M, again a 1.4 percent gap. The R20 single-core result is tighter: 135 for the 3610ME and 133 for the 3320M, a 1.5 percent edge.

Moving to Cinebench R23, the 3610ME extends its lead slightly in both workloads. In multi-core, it scores 2289 against 2258 for the 3320M, a 1.4 percent margin. In single-core, the 3610ME records 323 versus 318, a 1.5 percent advantage. The head-to-head table confirms a clean sweep: the 3610ME wins all five benchmark comparisons, with no tests where the 3320M comes out ahead. The largest single delta is 1.5 percent, so these are not dramatic differences, but they are consistent across every rendering workload measured.

Looking at the broader database context, the 3320M holds a slightly higher average benchmark score of 803, while the 3610ME averages 788. That is a 15-point difference, yet the head-to-head results tell a different story because the 3320M’s average includes Geekbench scores that the 3610ME lacks in the recorded set. The 3320M’s Geekbench multi-core score is 1146 and its single-core score is 589, figures that pull its average up, but those tests are not present for the 3610ME in the database. For the tests where both CPUs have recorded results, the 3610ME is uniformly faster.

The percentile rankings place the 3320M at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, one point above the 3610ME’s 21st percentile. That ranking is based on the full average score, so the 3320M’s Geekbench data gives it a marginal overall standing despite losing every head-to-head comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the win tally: the 3610ME wins all five head-to-head tests, while the 3320M wins none. In rendering workloads, which is what Cinebench measures, the 3610ME is the faster part by a small but repeatable margin. For users running Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, whether multi-threaded or single-threaded, the 3610ME delivers the better result.

The 3320M’s only advantage in the recorded data appears outside the head-to-head set. Its Geekbench scores, 1146 multi-core and 589 single-core, are not matched by any 3610ME result in the database. That means the 3320M can claim a stronger showing in Geekbench-style synthetic tests, but no direct comparison exists for that benchmark. The average benchmark score also favors the 3320M, 803 versus 788, so in a broad average sense it looks like the better overall part. But the user should weigh that against the fact that every direct comparison in the database favors the 3610ME.

For mobile workloads, both CPUs are 35-watt parts with the same core and thread counts, so the performance gap in Cinebench is the only differentiator in the recorded data. The 3610ME is the pick for anyone prioritizing rendering performance in applications that resemble Cinebench’s workload. The 3320M is the pick only if the Geekbench results matter more, since those are the only tests where it has a recorded edge, and even then only relative to its own average, not against the 3610ME directly.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design. They are Ivy Bridge parts built on Intel’s 22 nm process, with a die size of 118 mm². Each has 2 cores and 4 threads, meaning both support Hyper-Threading. The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. Neither supports ECC memory, and both use dual-channel memory buses. Integrated graphics are the same Intel HD 4000 on both chips.

The key differences are in clock speeds and socket. The 3320M has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The 3610ME starts slightly higher at 2.70 GHz base, with the same 3.30 GHz boost. That 100 MHz base-clock advantage is the likely source of the 3610ME’s consistent lead in Cinebench tests, since the boost clocks are identical and the architecture, cache, and process node are the same.

The sockets differ. The 3320M uses Intel BGA 1023, while the 3610ME uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). That means the two are not drop-in interchangeable on the same motherboard. The 3610ME’s socket is traditionally associated with embedded or industrial designs, while the 3320M targets standard mobile laptops. Both are listed as mobile market segment parts, and both have the same TDP of 35 watts.

The part numbers differ as well: SR0MY for the 3320M and SR0QJ for the 3610ME. Both CPUs were released on the same date, May 31, 2012, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. Neither is multiplier-unlocked, so overclocking is not an option on either chip. The generation field names both as Core i5 (Ivy Bridge), and both come from the same codename family.

In practical terms, the only architectural differentiators that matter are the base clock and the socket. Everything else, from process node to cache sizes to integrated graphics, is identical. The 3610ME’s higher base clock gives it a small but measurable edge in every benchmark where both are recorded.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if modest, winner: the Intel Core i5-3610ME. It wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with deltas ranging from 1.3 to 1.5 percent. For Cinebench workloads, which are the only direct comparisons available, the 3610ME is consistently faster. The 3320M’s higher average benchmark score, 803 versus 788, comes entirely from Geekbench results that have no counterpart for the 3610ME, so it does not translate to a win in any direct test.

A user choosing between these two should pick the 3610ME if they care about rendering performance as measured by Cinebench. The margins are small, but they are uniform across all five tests. The 3320M still holds value as a part with a better overall average score in the database, and its Geekbench numbers are strong, but those results are not comparable to the 3610ME because the 3610ME lacks Geekbench data.

Socket compatibility is the bigger practical factor. The 3320M uses BGA 1023, which is common in laptops, while the 3610ME uses Socket G2 (988B), which appears more often in embedded systems. If the motherboard dictates the choice, that will override the small performance difference. But if either socket is viable, the 3610ME is the faster part in every recorded comparison.

The percentile rankings are nearly tied, 22nd for the 3320M and 21st for the 3610ME, reinforcing that both sit in the lower quarter of all CPUs. These are not high-performance parts by modern standards, but within their own pair, the 3610ME is the better performer. The verdict is straightforward: the 3610ME wins on benchmark performance, while the 3320M wins only on average score and Geekbench-specific results that lack a direct rival comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-3320M has an average benchmark score of 803, while the Intel Core i5-3610ME averages 788.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmark wins does each CPU have?

A: The 3610ME wins all five head-to-head tests, while the 3320M wins none.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two CPUs in any head-to-head test?

A: The largest delta is 1.5 percent, seen in both Cinebench R20 single-core and Cinebench R23 single-core, with the 3610ME ahead.

Q: Do the two CPUs share the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both use Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics.

Q: Are the sockets the same for both processors?

A: No, the 3320M uses Intel BGA 1023, while the 3610ME uses Intel Socket G2 (988B).

Q: What is the base clock difference between the two?

A: The 3320M has a 2.60 GHz base clock, while the 3610ME has a 2.70 GHz base clock. Both have a 3.30 GHz boost clock.