Intel Core i7-3610QM vs Intel Core i7-3615QM Comparison

Intel Core i7-3615QM and Intel Core i7-3610QM are nearly identical Ivy Bridge mobile processors, separated by a single letter in their model numbers and a few percentage points in benchmark results. The data shows the i7-3615QM winning all eight head-to-head tests, but the margins are often razor-thin, making the i7-3610QM a strong alternative depending on platform needs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the Intel Core i7-3615QM comes in Geekbench multicore, where it scores 1907 against 1831 for the i7-3610QM. That 4.2% delta is the largest gap in the entire comparison, indicating a meaningful advantage in heavily threaded workloads that scale beyond pure clock-for-clock performance. The singlecore Geekbench test also favors the i7-3615QM, with a 554 to 537 result, a 3.2% edge that suggests slightly better per-thread efficiency in this particular benchmark suite.

Cinebench results tell a tighter story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-3615QM scores 442 versus 440 for the i7-3610QM, a 0.5% difference that falls within run-to-run noise for most testing scenarios. The singlecore R15 test is a dead heat at 62 points for both chips, with a 0% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore gap remains at 0.5% — 1845 for the i7-3615QM against 1836 — while the singlecore test shows a 0.4% margin (260 vs 259). Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multicore 4393 vs 4373 (0.5% delta) and singlecore 620 vs 617 (0.5% delta).

The overall benchmark picture is one of consistent, if modest, superiority for the i7-3615QM. Its average benchmark score sits at 1260, compared to 1244 for the i7-3610QM, a 1.3% aggregate advantage. Both chips land in the 34th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier relative to the broader market. The i7-3615QM’s nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon 200GE (matching score of 1261, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i3-7100T (1258, 0.2% delta). The i7-3610QM, meanwhile, is closest to the Intel Pentium Gold G6600 (1235, 0.7% delta) and the Intel Core i3-8109U (1235, 0.7% delta), with the Core i3-7100T slightly ahead at 1258 (-1.1% delta).

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded tasks?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QM wins all four multicore benchmarks: Cinebench R15 (442 vs 440), R20 (1845 vs 1836), R23 (4393 vs 4373), and Geekbench multicore (1907 vs 1831). The largest margin is 4.2% in Geekbench.

Q: Is there any workload where the Intel Core i7-3610QM wins?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i7-3615QM winning all 8 benchmark comparisons. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, both chips tie at 62 points, but the i7-3610QM never takes a lead.

Q: Are the two chips built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both use Intel’s 22 nm process node with 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. They share the same Ivy Bridge architecture and codename.

Q: What is the difference in their sockets?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QM uses Intel BGA 1224, which is a soldered, non-upgradeable socket. The Intel Core i7-3610QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a PGA socket that allows for processor replacement in compatible laptops.

Q: Do they have identical cache configurations?

A: Yes. Both have 64 KB L1 cache per core, 256 KB L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. There is no difference in cache hierarchy between the two.

Q: How does the i7-3610QM compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i7-3610QM’s average score of 1244 places it 0.7% ahead of the Intel Pentium Gold G6600 and Intel Core i3-8109U (both 1235), and 1% ahead of the Intel Xeon E3-1235L v5 (1232). It trails the Intel Core i3-7100T (1258) by 1.1%.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture, the third iteration of the Core microarchitecture. They use the same 22 nm process node, fabricated by Intel, with 1,400 million transistors packed into a 160 mm² die. The transistor count and die size are identical, which is expected given the shared architecture and production method.

The cache layout is also identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This means memory latency characteristics and cache-hit behaviour should be indistinguishable between the two parts.

The integrated graphics solution is the same Intel HD 4000 on both chips. This is a significant architectural feature for mobile parts, as it eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in many laptop configurations. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both feature dual-channel memory buses.

The core configuration matches as well: 4 physical cores with 8 threads via Hyper-Threading. Both chips have a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. Neither multiplier is unlocked, so overclocking is not an option on either platform.

The key architectural difference lies in the platform integration. The i7-3615QM is designed for BGA 1224, meaning it is permanently attached to the motherboard. The i7-3610QM targets Socket G2 (988B), which is a socketed design. This is a fundamental packaging difference that affects repairability and upgrade paths, though it does not change the underlying CPU microarchitecture.

The i7-3610QM also lists explicit memory support for DDR3 and a memory bandwidth figure of 25.6 GB/s, while the i7-3615QM’s memory support field is null in the data. The i7-3610QM additionally specifies PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the i7-3615QM has no PCIe field listed. These differences suggest the i7-3610QM may have more complete platform documentation, but the underlying memory controller and PCIe implementation are likely the same given the shared architecture.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in only a handful of documented fields. The socket is the primary hardware distinction: Intel BGA 1224 for the i7-3615QM versus Intel Socket G2 (988B) for the i7-3610QM. This affects physical installation more than performance.

Memory support is listed for the i7-3610QM as DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-3615QM has no memory support specification in the data. Similarly, PCIe details are only provided for the i7-3610QM: Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i7-3615QM does not have a PCIe field.

Production status differs: the i7-3610QM is marked as end-of-life, while the i7-3615QM has no production status listed. Release dates are close but not identical — the i7-3615QM launched on 2012-04-28, and the i7-3610QM on 2012-04-22, a six-day gap.

The i7-3610QM has a launch MSRP of $378, while the i7-3615QM has no launch MSRP listed. Part numbers also differ: SR0MP for the i7-3615QM and SR0MN for the i7-3610QM.

All compute-relevant specifications are identical: 4 cores, 8 threads, 2.30 GHz base, 3.30 GHz boost, 45 W TDP, 22 nm process, 1,400 million transistors, 160 mm² die, and the full cache hierarchy. Both use Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics, have dual-channel memory buses, and do not support ECC or unlocked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3615QM wins every benchmark comparison, but the practical significance varies by workload. In Geekbench multicore, the 4.2% lead (1907 vs 1831) is the most substantial and suggests a real advantage in applications that leverage multiple threads, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific computing. The 3.2% singlecore Geekbench margin (554 vs 537) also points to better performance in lightly threaded tasks like web browsing or office productivity.

For Cinebench workloads, the i7-3615QM’s wins are marginal — all four tests show deltas between 0.4% and 0.5%. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, the two chips tie exactly at 62 points. This means that for users running Cinebench-based rendering or animation tasks, the difference between the two processors is unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use.

The i7-3610QM’s advantages are not in benchmark scores but in platform flexibility. Its Socket G2 (988B) design allows for processor replacement, which is valuable for users who want to upgrade or service their laptop CPU. The i7-3615QM’s BGA 1224 socket is soldered, locking the chip to the motherboard. The i7-3610QM also has explicit DDR3 memory support and PCIe Gen 3 16-lane specifications, making it the better-documented option for system builders.

In summary, the i7-3615QM is the faster chip in every measured test, but its edge is narrow outside of Geekbench. The i7-3610QM offers socketed installation and more complete platform specifications, which may be deciding factors for users prioritizing upgradeability over a few percentage points of performance. Both chips sit at the 34th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are entry-level performers by modern standards, but they remain viable for basic multitasking and light content creation.