Intel Core i7-3612QE vs Intel Core i7-3612QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places these two mobile processors in an unusually close contest. Across the six shared Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i7-3612QE wins every single matchup, but the margins are consistently narrow. The largest gap appears in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the QE scores 56 against the QM's 55, a delta of 1.8%. That is the only test where the lead stretches beyond a single percentage point.

Multi-threaded workloads tell a similar story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the QE posts 399 versus 397 for the QM, a 0.5% advantage. The R20 multicore run shows 1666 against 1656, a 0.6% edge. The R23 multicore result follows the same pattern: 3967 for the QE, 3944 for the QM, again a 0.6% difference. These are not transformative leads. They suggest two chips with nearly identical execution characteristics, where the QE holds a slight but consistent edge.

Single-core results reinforce the pattern. The R20 single-core test gives the QE 235 points and the QM 233, a 0.9% gap. The R23 single-core run shows 560 versus 556, a 0.7% difference. Every recorded benchmark points in the same direction. The QE is faster, but only by a hair. The average benchmark score tells a broader story: the QE sits at 1147, while the QM trails at 1129. That 18-point gap places the QE at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with the QM one point behind at the 32nd percentile.

The nearest rival data adds context. The QE's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-4430, which scores 1149, a delta of -0.2% against the QE. The QM's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-4370 at 1130, a delta of -0.1%. Both chips sit in a dense cluster of mid-range desktop and mobile parts, where a few points separate dozens of processors. The QE's 0.1% lead over the AMD Opteron 4284 and the Intel Core i7-2600S, both at 1146, shows how tightly packed this performance tier is.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design. They are built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, using a 22 nm process node from Intel's own foundry. The transistor count is identical at 1,400 million, and the die size matches at 160 mm². Each chip has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The thermal design power is 35 watts for both, a figure that matters for thin laptops and compact mobile workstations.

The cache hierarchy is also identical. Each core gets 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2, with a shared 6 MB L3 pool. Memory access runs through a dual-channel bus, and both chips integrate Intel HD 4000 graphics. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The generation label is the same: Core i7 (Ivy Bridge). The release date matches as well, with both appearing on 2012-04-28.

The key difference lies in the socket. The QE uses Intel BGA 1023, a ball-grid array package that is soldered directly to the motherboard. The QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a socketed design that allows the processor to be removed and replaced. This distinction has practical implications for system builders and repair technicians. A BGA part is permanent, while a socketed part offers upgrade or replacement options. The part numbers differ accordingly: SR0ND for the QE, SR0MQ for the QM.

Beyond the socket, the recorded data shows no architectural divergence. The two chips are effectively the same silicon, packaged for different mounting methods. The benchmark deltas likely stem from minor manufacturing variation or platform-level differences in the test systems, not from any fundamental design change. The QE's consistent but tiny wins across all six tests suggest a slightly better bin, but the magnitude of the advantage is within the noise of typical silicon variation.

Where Each One Wins

The QE wins every head-to-head test in the database. That makes the use-case split straightforward: if the recorded benchmarks are the only consideration, the QE is the better performer in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The largest margin, 1.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core, is the QE's most decisive victory. For applications that rely heavily on single-thread performance, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools, that edge, while small, is the most meaningful one in the dataset.

Multi-threaded workloads show a tighter race. The QE leads by 0.5% in R15 multicore, 0.6% in R20 multicore, and 0.6% in R23 multicore. For rendering, video encoding, or compilation tasks that scale across all 8 threads, the QE still comes out ahead, but the advantage is nearly imperceptible in real-world use. The QM's additional Geekbench results, which are not part of the head-to-head comparison, show a multicore score of 1691 and a single-core score of 501. These numbers are not directly comparable to the Cinebench results, but they indicate that the QM is a capable performer in its own right.

The QM's only claim to a win is the socket. For users who prioritize serviceability or future upgrades, the Socket G2 (988B) design allows the processor to be swapped without replacing the motherboard. The QE's BGA 1023 package offers no such flexibility. That is not a performance win, but it is a practical one for certain use cases. The data does not include any test where the QM outperforms the QE, so the performance verdict is unambiguous.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear, if narrow, conclusion. The Intel Core i7-3612QE is the faster processor in every recorded test. Its wins range from 0.5% to 1.8%, with the single-core R15 test showing the largest gap. The QE also holds a higher average benchmark score, 1147 versus 1129, and a slightly better percentile ranking, 33rd versus 32nd. For anyone choosing purely on performance, the QE is the pick.

The QM, however, is not a poor alternative. Its scores are within a rounding error of the QE in most tests. The R23 multicore gap is 23 points out of nearly 4,000, a difference that would be invisible in everyday use. The QM's socketed design is a genuine advantage for systems that might need a processor swap down the line. The QE's BGA package is a dead end in that regard.

The choice comes down to platform priorities. If the motherboard is fixed and the processor is permanent, the QE's slight performance edge makes it the better option. If the system allows for future processor changes, the QM's socketed form factor offers flexibility that the QE cannot match. The data does not show any scenario where the QM wins on raw performance, so the QE is the default recommendation for performance-focused builds. The QM is the sensible choice for serviceability-focused ones.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-3612QE wins all three single-core Cinebench tests. It scores 56 in R15, 235 in R20, and 560 in R23, compared to the QM's 55, 233, and 556 respectively.

Q: How large is the performance gap between the two chips?

A: The largest gap is 1.8% in the Cinebench R15 single-core test. All other deltas range from 0.5% to 0.9%, with the QE leading in every case.

Q: Do the two processors share the same architecture?

A: Yes. Both are built on the Ivy Bridge architecture with a 22 nm process node, 1,400 million transistors, and a 160 mm² die size. They also share the same core count, thread count, clock speeds, and cache configuration.

Q: What is the main difference between the two chips?

A: The socket. The QE uses Intel BGA 1023, a soldered package, while the QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a socketed design that allows for processor removal and replacement.

Q: Which chip has a better average benchmark score?

A: The QE has an average benchmark score of 1147, while the QM sits at 1129. The QE also ranks at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, one point above the QM's 32nd percentile.

Q: Does the QM win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The QE wins all six shared Cinebench tests. The QM does have additional Geekbench results in the database, but those are not part of the head-to-head comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in only a few recorded fields. The socket is the primary distinction: the QE uses Intel BGA 1023, while the QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). The part numbers also differ, with the QE carrying the SR0ND identifier and the QM using SR0MQ. The benchmark results differ as well, with the QE posting higher scores in all six shared tests and a higher average benchmark score of 1147 versus 1129. The percentile ranking differs by one point, 33rd for the QE and 32nd for the QM. All other specifications, including cores, threads, clocks, TDP, cache, integrated graphics, memory bus, and release date, are identical.