Intel Core i7-3615QM vs Intel Core i7-3632QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two Ivy Bridge mobile processors into two clear narratives. In Cinebench, the Intel Core i7-3615QM dominates across every test, while in Geekbench, the Intel Core i7-3632QM takes both wins. The scoreboard shows 6 wins for the i7-3615QM and 2 wins for the i7-3632QM.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the i7-3615QM posts 442 points in multicore against 406 for the i7-3632QM, a 8.9% advantage. The single-core result follows the same pattern: 62 versus 57, an 8.8% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the gap widens slightly. The i7-3615QM scores 1845 multicore and 260 single-core, while the i7-3632QM manages 1693 and 238, respectively. Those deltas are 9% and 9.2%. Cinebench R23 tells the same story: the i7-3615QM reaches 4393 multicore and 620 single-core, beating the i7-3632QM's 4033 and 569 by 8.9% and 9%.

The Geekbench results flip the script entirely. In multicore, the i7-3632QM scores 2142 against 1907 for the i7-3615QM, a 11% advantage. Single-core Geekbench also favors the i7-3632QM: 613 versus 554, a 9.6% lead. This is a notable split, as the two suites measure different workloads and produce opposite rankings.

The average benchmark score reinforces this divergence. The i7-3615QM averages 1260 across all tests, while the i7-3632QM averages 1219. Both processors sit at the 34th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy similar overall performance tiers despite their test-specific differences.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design. They are built on the Ivy Bridge architecture using a 22 nm process node at Intel's foundry. Each has 4 cores and 8 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache is 6 MB on both chips. Die size is identical at 160 mm². Integrated graphics are also the same: Intel HD 4000. Both support dual-channel memory and lack ECC support. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The key architectural difference appears in clock speeds and power envelopes. The i7-3615QM runs at a 2.30 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.30 GHz, while the i7-3632QM runs at 2.20 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. That 0.10 GHz difference at both ends explains the Cinebench performance gap, as higher clocks directly translate to faster rendering. The i7-3615QM carries a 45 W TDP, while the i7-3632QM is rated at 35 W, a 10 W difference that makes the latter the more power-efficient part on paper.

Transistor counts differ slightly. The i7-3615QM has 1,400 million transistors, while the i7-3632QM has 1,480 million. Despite this 80 million transistor difference, the die size remains identical at 160 mm², suggesting the i7-3632QM packs denser circuitry. The socket also differs: the i7-3615QM uses Intel BGA 1224, while the i7-3632QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). Release dates are a few months apart, with the i7-3615QM arriving in April 2012 and the i7-3632QM in October 2012. The i7-3615QM carries the part number SR0MP; no part number is recorded for the i7-3632QM.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for each chip's standing. The i7-3615QM sits within 0.4% of the AMD Athlon 200GE, the Intel Core i3-7100T, the Intel Xeon W-2102, and the Intel Core i3-1005G1. The i7-3632QM similarly trades blows with the Intel Core i5-2500, Intel Pentium Silver N6005, Intel Xeon E5-1607 v3, and Intel Core i3-7300T, with deltas ranging from -0.1% to 0.7%. Neither chip stands out dramatically from its immediate peers in average score.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload priority. For Cinebench-style rendering, the Intel Core i7-3615QM is the superior part, with a consistent 9% advantage across all three Cinebench versions in both multicore and single-core tests. The higher base and boost clocks directly drive this result. Users running CPU rendering workloads, video encoding, or 3D scene compilation should pick the i7-3615QM.

For Geekbench-style workloads, which often reflect broader system responsiveness and memory access patterns, the Intel Core i7-3632QM wins by a substantial margin. Its multicore score is 11% higher and single-core is 9.6% higher. The lower TDP of 35 W also makes it the better choice for thermally constrained laptops or longer battery life, assuming the Geekbench results translate to real-world responsiveness.

The overall average score favors the i7-3615QM by 41 points (1260 versus 1219), but both chips occupy the same 34th percentile of all CPUs. This means neither offers a class-breaking advantage. The i7-3632QM's lower power draw and Geekbench wins make it attractive for general productivity and efficiency. The i7-3615QM's Cinebench dominance makes it the pick for compute-heavy tasks. There is no universal winner; the correct choice depends entirely on whether the user prioritizes rendering performance or power efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QM wins 6 out of 8 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i7-3632QM wins the remaining 2.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i7-3615QM scores 4393, while the i7-3632QM scores 4033, giving the i7-3615QM an 8.9% advantage.

Q: How do the processors compare in Geekbench single-core?

A: The i7-3632QM scores 613, which is 9.6% higher than the i7-3615QM's 554.

Q: Are both processors built on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Ivy Bridge architecture and a 22 nm process node. They also share the same 4-core, 8-thread configuration and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

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

A: The i7-3615QM has a 45 W TDP, while the i7-3632QM has a 35 W TDP, making the i7-3632QM the lower-power option.

Q: Do both processors have the same integrated graphics?

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

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i7-3615QM: Rendering and compute-heavy workloads. Every Cinebench test, from R15 through R23, shows this chip leading by roughly 9% in both multicore and single-core scores. The higher 2.30 GHz base clock and 3.30 GHz boost clock give it a direct advantage in sustained CPU-bound tasks. Users running 3D rendering, video encoding, or batch photo processing should choose this part. The 45 W TDP is a trade-off, but the performance payoff is consistent. Its average benchmark score of 1260 also edges out the i7-3632QM's 1219, making it the stronger all-around performer in the database's aggregate measurements.

Intel Core i7-3632QM: Efficiency and Geekbench responsiveness. The 35 W TDP makes this the smarter choice for laptops where thermal headroom and battery life matter. Its Geekbench results are significantly better: 11% higher multicore and 9.6% higher single-core compared to the i7-3615QM. This suggests better performance in memory-sensitive and mixed workloads that Geekbench measures. The lower base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost of 3.20 GHz do not hold it back in these tests. For general productivity, web browsing, and office applications, the i7-3632QM's combination of lower power draw and higher Geekbench scores makes it the more balanced option. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-2500 and Intel Pentium Silver N6005, placing it in a similar performance tier to those desktop and mobile parts.