Intel Core i5-3330S vs Intel Core i7-3612QE Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3612QE and the Intel Core i5-3330S are two Ivy Bridge quad-cores from 2012 that arrived within a few months of each other, and the recorded benchmark data shows a consistent pattern: the mobile embedded i7 wins every shared test by a remarkably uniform margin of roughly 19 percent. What makes this comparison interesting is not the margin itself but the profile of the two parts, because the i7 achieves that lead while operating under a thermal envelope of 35 watts, less than half of the 77 watts the desktop i5 is rated for. The following analysis walks through the database measurements, the architectural overlaps, and the practical split between the two chips.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clean sweep for the Core i7-3612QE across all five head-to-head benchmarks. In Cinebench R15 multi-core the i7 scores 399 points against 335 for the i5-3330S, a lead of 19.1 percent. Cinebench R20 multi-core goes the same way, 1666 against 1396, a 19.3 percent gap. The single-core results repeat the story: 235 versus 196 in R20 single-core (19.9 percent) and 560 versus 469 in R23 single-core (19.4 percent). The flagship Cinebench R23 multi-core test lands at 3967 for the i7 versus 3326 for the i5, again 19.3 percent in the i7's favor.

Where does the i5-3330S win? Nowhere in the shared test set, but the database does hold results for it that the i7 lacks: Geekbench single-core and multi-core, where the desktop part posts 549 and 1625 respectively. Those entries expand the i5's recorded coverage without changing the head-to-head outcome, which stands at five wins to zero in favor of the i7-3612QE.

The uniformity of the gap deserves attention. A spread of 19.1 to 19.9 percent across five separate tests, spanning both single-core and multi-core workloads and three Cinebench generations, indicates the advantage is architectural rather than workload-specific. The driver is hyper-threading: the i7 presents 8 threads to the operating system on its 4 cores, while the i5 offers 4 threads on 4 cores. In rendering tests that scale across logical processors, that difference compounds with the i7's stronger per-thread throughput, and the result is the consistent 19 percent band visible throughout the data.

Context from the broader database reinforces how close these two parts sit in the overall rankings. The i7-3612QE has an average benchmark score of 1147 and sits at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-3330S averages 1128 at the 32nd percentile. Their nearest-rivals lists confirm the overlap: the i7's closest comparators are the AMD Opteron 4284 (average score 1146, within 0.1 percent), the Intel Core i7-2600S (1146, within 0.1 percent), the Intel Core i5-4430 (1149, 0.2 percent ahead), and the AMD Opteron 4332 HE (1144, within 0.3 percent). The i5's neighbors include the Intel Core i7-2720QM (1128, dead even), the Intel Core i3-1115GRE (1127, within 0.1 percent), the Intel Core i7-3612QM (1129, 0.1 percent ahead), and the Intel Core i5-4690T (1129, 0.1 percent ahead). Two chips one percentile apart, yet the i7 wins every shared measurement.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share far more than they differ. Both are built on Intel's Ivy Bridge architecture, fabricated at Intel on a 22 nm process, and both carry the same cache hierarchy: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 6 MB of L3 cache. Both connect to dual-channel memory and both lack ECC support. Both ship with locked multipliers. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The differences concentrate in four areas: threading, clocks, platform, and integration. The i7-3612QE is a mobile part with 4 cores and 8 threads, a 2.10 GHz base clock and a 3.10 GHz boost clock, packaged on Intel BGA 1023, meaning it is soldered rather than socketed. The i5-3330S is a desktop part with 4 cores and 4 threads, running a 2.70 GHz base and a 3.20 GHz boost on Intel Socket 1155. Note the inversion in the raw numbers: the desktop i5 actually has the marginally higher stated clocks at both base and boost, yet loses every recorded benchmark. The i7's hyper-threading and its efficiency-optimized design more than compensate for the clock deficit in the measured results.

Thermal design power is the sharpest contrast: 35 watts for the mobile i7 against 77 watts for the desktop i5. The i7 delivers its 19 percent performance advantage from well under half the thermal envelope, which is the defining characteristic of this pairing in the data.

Physical and platform details diverge as well. The i7's die measures 160 mm² and packs 1,400 million transistors; the i5's die is 133 mm², with transistor count unrecorded. The i5's platform support is documented more fully: DDR3 memory, PCI Express Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, and Intel HD 2500 integrated graphics. The i7 carries the stronger Intel HD 4000 integrated GPU, though its memory and PCIe specifics are not recorded in the database. Release dates were several months apart, with the mobile i7 recorded first and the desktop i5 following later in 2012.

The Verdict

Strictly from the measured data, the Core i7-3612QE is the stronger processor in every shared workload, by a consistent margin near 19 percent, single-core and multi-core alike. A buyer choosing purely on benchmark performance should prefer the i7. That preference carries one practical caveat visible in the specifications: the i7 is a BGA-packaged mobile part, soldered to its board, whereas the i5 uses Socket 1155, the conventional desktop interface of its era. The i5 also offers the more fully documented desktop platform, including DDR3 support, 16 lanes of PCIe Gen 3, and upgrade flexibility that a soldered mobile chip cannot match.

For efficiency-sensitive designs, the data is unambiguous: the i7's 35 watt envelope against the i5's 77 watts, combined with superior performance across the board, makes the mobile part the clear choice where thermals matter. For standard desktop builds where socketed installation and platform documentation matter, the i5-3330S remains the realistic option, accepting the roughly 19 percent performance deficit the benchmarks record.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Core i7-3612QE. It won all five head-to-head benchmarks, with leads between 19.1 and 19.9 percent across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: Why does the i7 beat the i5 when the i5 has higher clock speeds?

A: The i5-3330S runs 2.70 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost versus 2.10 and 3.10 for the i7, but the i7 supports 8 threads on its 4 cores through hyper-threading while the i5 handles only 4 threads. The benchmark data shows this more than offsets the clock deficit.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The i7 leads here too: 235 versus 196 in Cinebench R20 single-core and 560 versus 469 in R23 single-core, gaps of 19.9 and 19.4 percent respectively.

Q: Do they share the same cache and process technology?

A: Yes. Both are Ivy Bridge chips on Intel's 22 nm process, each with 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which has the lower power consumption?

A: The i7-3612QE, with a 35 watt thermal design power versus 77 watts for the i5-3330S.

Q: Can either chip be overclocked?

A: No. Both have locked multipliers according to the recorded specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Walking through the recorded results test by test, the pattern never shifts. The newest and most demanding shared measurement, Cinebench R23 multi-core, gives the i7-3612QE 3967 points against 3326 for the i5-3330S, a 19.3 percent advantage that represents the widest absolute gap in the dataset, 641 points. R23 single-core tells the same story at 560 versus 469, 19.4 percent apart.

Stepping back to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 1666 against 1396 (19.3 percent for the i7) and the single-core scores are 235 against 196 (19.9 percent, the largest relative margin recorded between the two). The older R15 multi-core test, the only R15 entry both chips share, closes the set at 399 versus 335, another 19.1 percent win for the i7.

The tight clustering of those five margins within less than one percentage point of each other is the most notable statistical feature of this matchup. It means the i7's advantage scales consistently across rendering engines of different generations and across both threading regimes, with no test where the i5-3330S narrows the gap. The i5's recorded Geekbench results, 549 single-core and 1625 multi-core, add coverage but have no i7 counterpart in the database, so they stand outside the head-to-head tally, which finishes at five wins for the i7-3612QE and none for the i5-3330S.

Specification Differences

The fields where the two parts diverge:

• Threads: 8 on the i7-3612QE, 4 on the i5-3330S
• Base clock: 2.10 GHz on the i7, 2.70 GHz on the i5
• Boost clock: 3.10 GHz on the i7, 3.20 GHz on the i5
• Thermal design power: 35 watts on the i7, 77 watts on the i5
• Socket: Intel BGA 1023 (soldered) on the i7, Intel Socket 1155 on the i5
• Market segment: Mobile for the i7, Desktop for the i5
• Die size: 160 mm² for the i7, 133 mm² for the i5
• Transistors: 1,400 million recorded for the i7, not recorded for the i5
• Integrated graphics: Intel HD 4000 on the i7, Intel HD 2500 on the i5
• Memory support: DDR3 documented for the i5, not recorded for the i7
• PCIe: Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes documented for the i5, not recorded for the i7
• Release date: the mobile i7 recorded first, the desktop i5 several months later in 2012
• Part numbers: SR0ND for the i7, SR0RR for the i5
• Recorded test coverage: the i5 has Geekbench single-core and multi-core entries plus R15 multi-core data, while the i7 adds Cinebench R15 single-core coverage

Everything else in the database matches: Ivy Bridge architecture, 22 nm Intel fabrication, 4 physical cores, the full cache hierarchy, dual-channel memory bus, no ECC, and locked multipliers on both.