Intel Core i5-4670R vs Intel Core i7-3615QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, if narrow, advantage for the Intel Core i5-4670R across every shared benchmark in the database. In the six head-to-head comparisons, the i5-4670R wins all six, with margins ranging from 1.1% to 1.6%. These are not dominant victories, but they are uniform, which points to a small but real performance edge in the tested workloads.

The largest delta appears in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the i5-4670R scores 63 against the i7-3615QM's 62, a 1.6% lead. The multi-core version of the same test shows the i5-4670R at 448 versus 442, a 1.4% margin. Moving to Cinebench R20, the i5-4670R posts 1868 in multi-core and 263 in single-core, while the i7-3615QM records 1845 and 260, respectively; both deltas sit at 1.2%.

The pattern continues in Cinebench R23. The i5-4670R reaches 4448 in multi-core and 627 in single-core, compared to 4393 and 620 for the i7-3615QM. Those translate to 1.3% and 1.1% advantages. The overall picture from these benchmarks is that the i5-4670R is marginally faster in every measured scenario, but the differences are small enough that they would likely be imperceptible in real-world use outside of heavily repeated synthetic runs.

Looking at broader averages, the i5-4670R carries an average benchmark score of 1286 across its recorded tests, while the i7-3615QM averages 1260. That is a roughly 2% gap in aggregate performance. The i5-4670R also sits at the 35th percentile among all CPUs in the database, one point higher than the i7-3615QM's 34th percentile. Neither processor is a high-flyer in the overall rankings, but the i5-4670R consistently occupies a slightly higher position.

The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce this positioning. The i5-4670R's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-3570, which matches its average score of 1286 exactly, with a 0% delta. The i7-3615QM, meanwhile, is most comparable to the AMD Athlon 200GE, which scores 1261 against the i7's 1260, a 0% delta. This suggests both chips sit in a similar performance tier, but the i5-4670R sits at the top of its immediate cluster, while the i7-3615QM is effectively tied with its nearest neighbor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations, and that shows up in several key specifications. The i5-4670R is built on the Haswell architecture, while the i7-3615QM uses Ivy Bridge. Both are manufactured on a 22 nm process at Intel's foundry, and both pack 1,400 million transistors. The die sizes differ slightly: the i5-4670R measures 177 mm², while the i7-3615QM is smaller at 160 mm².

Core and thread counts are a significant divergence. The i5-4670R has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning it lacks Hyper-Threading. The i7-3615QM also has 4 cores but doubles the thread count to 8. Despite this, the i5-4670R still wins every multi-core benchmark in the head-to-head set, which indicates that its higher clock speeds and newer architecture more than compensate for the missing threads in these specific Cinebench workloads.

Clock speeds tell part of that story. The i5-4670R runs at a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boosts to 3.70 GHz. The i7-3615QM starts lower at 2.30 GHz and boosts to 3.30 GHz. That is a 700 MHz gap at base and a 400 MHz gap at boost, both favoring the i5-4670R. The i5-4670R also has an unlocked multiplier, while the i7-3615QM's multiplier is locked, giving the former additional flexibility for overclocking, assuming the platform allows it.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The shared L3 cache, however, is 4 MB on the i5-4670R versus 6 MB on the i7-3615QM. The i7-3615QM's larger L3 pool is a logical advantage for a chip with more threads, but the benchmark data does not show it translating into a win in any of the tested multi-threaded scenarios.

The integrated graphics are another clear split. The i5-4670R comes with Intel Iris Pro 5200, while the i7-3615QM uses Intel HD 4000. No graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database, so a direct performance comparison is not possible from the available data, but the Iris Pro branding indicates a higher-tier iGPU relative to the HD 4000. The i5-4670R is classified as a desktop part, while the i7-3615QM is a mobile processor, which aligns with their socket differences: the i5-4670R uses Intel BGA 1364, and the i7-3615QM uses Intel BGA 1224.

Memory support also differs. The i5-4670R supports DDR3 memory, while the i7-3615QM's memory support field is not recorded, though it does have a dual-channel memory bus. Neither chip supports ECC memory. The i7-3615QM has a recorded part number of SR0MP, while no part number is listed for the i5-4670R. The i5-4670R's release date is June 2013, and the i7-3615QM's is April 2012, so the i5 is roughly a year newer in the product cycle.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-4670R wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set, so the use-case split is largely about degrees of advantage rather than different strengths. In single-threaded workloads, the i5-4670R holds a slim lead across all three Cinebench generations. The R15 single-core margin is 1.6%, the R20 margin is 1.2%, and the R23 margin is 1.1%. This consistency suggests that the i5-4670R's higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz gives it a small but reliable edge in tasks that depend on a single core, such as older games or lightly threaded applications.

In multi-threaded workloads, the i5-4670R also comes out ahead, despite having only 4 threads against the i7-3615QM's 8. The R15 multi-core margin is 1.4%, R20 is 1.2%, and R23 is 1.3%. This is notable because conventional expectations would favor the chip with more threads, but the i5-4670R's newer Haswell architecture and higher clocks offset that disadvantage in these Cinebench tests. For workloads that scale heavily with thread count beyond eight threads, the i7-3615QM might gain ground, but the recorded data does not include such tests.

The i7-3615QM's case rests on its thread count and larger L3 cache. With 8 threads, it is better positioned for heavily parallel tasks that can use more than four threads, even if the specific benchmarks here do not show it winning. Its 6 MB of L3 cache, versus 4 MB on the i5-4670R, could also help in workloads with large working sets that fit in cache. Additionally, the i7-3615QM has a lower TDP of 45 watts against the i5-4670R's 65 watts, which matters for thermal and power-constrained environments like laptops, where it is intended to operate.

For users prioritizing raw single-core responsiveness, the i5-4670R is the pick based on the data. For users who need more threads for parallel processing and are willing to accept a slight performance deficit in the tested benchmarks, the i7-3615QM offers that capability, along with a lower power envelope. The i7-3615QM also has a Geekbench multi-core score of 1907 and a single-core score of 554, though no comparable Geekbench figures are recorded for the i5-4670R, so those numbers cannot be directly compared.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-4670R has an average benchmark score of 1286, while the Intel Core i7-3615QM averages 1260.

Q: Does the i7-3615QM outperform the i5-4670R in any recorded benchmark?

A: No. In the six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the i5-4670R wins all of them, with margins between 1.1% and 1.6%.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both processors have 4 cores. The i5-4670R has 4 threads, while the i7-3615QM has 8 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two chips?

A: The largest gap is in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the i5-4670R leads by 1.6%.

Q: Which processor has a lower thermal design power?

A: The i7-3615QM has a TDP of 45 watts, lower than the i5-4670R's 65 watts.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 22 nm process and contain 1,400 million transistors.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i5-4670R is the faster processor in every benchmark the database records. It wins all six head-to-head tests, holds a higher average score (1286 versus 1260), and sits at a higher percentile (35th versus 34th). Its single-core and multi-core advantages are small but consistent, which makes it the safer choice for anyone prioritizing peak performance in Cinebench-style workloads.

The i7-3615QM is not without merit. Its 8 threads and 6 MB of L3 cache give it a structural advantage for certain parallel workloads, and its 45 watt TDP makes it more suitable for power-sensitive mobile designs. But in the measured tests, those advantages do not translate into wins. The i5-4670R's higher clocks and newer architecture overcome the thread deficit.

For a desktop user with some flexibility in cooling and power, the i5-4670R is the better performer according to the recorded metrics. For a laptop user or someone who values lower power draw and more threads for non-benchmarked parallel tasks, the i7-3615QM remains a viable option, but it will trail the i5-4670R in the specific tests shown here.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-4670R | Intel Core i7-3615QM |

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

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1364 | Intel BGA 1224 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Ivy Bridge |

| Codename | Haswell | Ivy Bridge |

| Generation | Core i5 (Haswell) | Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) |

| Die Size | 177 mm² | 160 mm² |

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

| Memory Support | DDR3 | Not recorded |

| Memory Bus | Not recorded | Dual-channel |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Iris Pro 5200 | Intel HD 4000 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2013-06-01 | 2012-04-28 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | Not recorded | SR0MP |