Tuesday, March 20th 2012

Intel Core i7-3610QM Tested

Several next-generation performance-segment notebook models across brands, will be driven by Intel's Core i7-3610QM, a quad-core chip based on the 22 nm Ivy Bridge silicon, clocked at 2.30 GHz (3.30 GHz Turbo), featuring 6 MB L3 cache. The chip features the complete instruction-set of Intel's third-generation Core processor family. DonanimHaber got to test a Samsung notebook that's based on this chip (which also uses NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M graphics), the chip was put through SuperPi 1M and 2M; and Cinebench R11. The chip crunched Pi 1M in 11.66 s, and 2M in 26.67 s. It scored 6.09 pts in Cinebench, which is a higher score than that of AMD FX-8150, DonanimHaber notes.

Source: DonanimHaber
Add your own comment

40 Comments on Intel Core i7-3610QM Tested

#1
Hayder_Master
by: btarunr
It scored 6.09 pts in Cinebench, which is a higher score than that of AMD FX-8150
it's the most funny thing :roll:
Posted on Reply
#2
(FIH) The Don
i have lost all faith in AMD's cpu segment :banghead:

if they will focus on their smaller cpu's/apu's or wutdafuq its called and their graphics it will be good

oh yeah, the new i7 looks mighty good :O
Posted on Reply
#3
Mulderer
OMG an Intel mobile chip beats AMD's monster desktop..?
Posted on Reply
#4
radarblade
Damn! Those are like desktop 2600K scores! Ivy is packing a serious punch in it's mobile department. :eek:
Posted on Reply
#5
D4S4
the 3.3ghz turbo might have had something to do with it. i wonder what kind of clock speeds will the desktop variations run
Posted on Reply
#6
Assimilator
AMD's fastest desktop CPU beaten by Intel's fastest laptop CPU... that's sad any way you slice it.
Posted on Reply
#7
NHKS
& this isnt even the 'extreme'(i7-3???XM) edition..
Posted on Reply
#8
bear jesus
by: Mulderer
OMG an Intel mobile chip beats AMD's monster desktop..?
by: Assimilator
AMD's fastest desktop CPU beaten by Intel's fastest laptop CPU... that's sad any way you slice it.
The old mobile 6 core I7s beat the desktop phenom IIs, i am willing to bet this has been happening for many generations thus nothing has changed.
Posted on Reply
#10
AvonX
LoL

I can't wait for pile of sh*t to come out. :D
Posted on Reply
#13
pjladyfox
Guess I was the only one who was more interested in scores for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M than the CPU score. I mean, I like AMD but the entire Intel beating an AMD CPU at this point is like the local school jocks giving a swirlie to one of the nerds; sad it happens but not really a surprise anymore.
Posted on Reply
#14
dieterd
and this is only the weakest quadcore mobile processor, what preformance will i7-38xx QM and i7-39xx XM show.... those quad i7-26xx are very affordable so i7-36xx should make no difference, but to bad that real buyable products of thease will apear in the end of Q3 :(
Posted on Reply
#15
trickson
OH, I have such a headache


:roll: :banghead:
Posted on Reply
#16
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: bear jesus
The old mobile 6 core I7s beat the desktop phenom IIs, i am willing to bet this has been happening for many generations thus nothing has changed.
It doesn't make it any less pathetic, regardless of if it's SOP or not.
Posted on Reply
#17
mastrdrver
by: Mulderer
OMG an Intel mobile chip beats AMD's monster desktop..?
In the Cinebench it beats the desktop Intel i7 970. What's that say about Intel's desktop parts?

So when is the leak going to happen with Wprime instead of the dated Super Pi that uses expired and non supported code path? (SSE vs x87 respectively)

I love how all the Intel leaks always use absolutely worthless benchmarks to tell us any potential (or lack of) that the CPU has. :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#18
[H]@RD5TUFF
by: mastrdrver
In the Cinebench it beats the desktop Intel i7 970. What's that say about Intel's desktop parts?

So when is the leak going to happen with Wprime instead of the dated Super Pi that uses expired and non supported code path? (SSE vs x87 respectively)

I love how all the Intel leaks always use absolutely worthless benchmarks to tell us any potential (or lack of) that the CPU has. :shadedshu
LOL could you be more transparent, only an AMD fanboy would claim tests to be pointless that make AMD look bad, yet if it looked good for AMD they would be very important.

The chip performs well, very well apparently, deal!
Posted on Reply
#19
MikeMurphy
by: mastrdrver
In the Cinebench it beats the desktop Intel i7 970. What's that say about Intel's desktop parts?

So when is the leak going to happen with Wprime instead of the dated Super Pi that uses expired and non supported code path? (SSE vs x87 respectively)

I love how all the Intel leaks always use absolutely worthless benchmarks to tell us any potential (or lack of) that the CPU has. :shadedshu
Its a good thing Intel doesn't compete with Intel.

Also, SuperPi doesn't need to be optimized because its not a tool to compare different architectures.
Posted on Reply
#20
MikeMurphy
by: bear jesus
The old mobile 6 core I7s beat the desktop phenom IIs, i am willing to bet this has been happening for many generations thus nothing has changed.
Since when did Intel produce a mobile 6 core part?
Posted on Reply
#21
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
by: MikeMurphy
Since when did Intel produce a mobile 6 core part?
No need to, A quad is still better than any thing AMD has. :eek:
J/K :D but seriously yeah :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#22
bear jesus
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
It doesn't make it any less pathetic, regardless of if it's SOP or not.
In no way was i denying that, i was just trying to point out this is not a new thing since bulldozer, really it is just AMD getting it's ass kicked in the CPU market as usual for recent years.
by: MikeMurphy
Since when did Intel produce a mobile 6 core part?
I may possibly be wrong :laugh: but if so i blame Eurocom for selling 6 core i7's in laptops.
Posted on Reply
#23
mastrdrver
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
LOL could you be more transparent, only an AMD fanboy would claim tests to be pointless that make AMD look bad, yet if it looked good for AMD they would be very important.

The chip performs well, very well apparently, deal!
Explain an AMD fanboy that spends $500 on an Intel part? I'd love to hear it.

by: MikeMurphy
Its a good thing Intel doesn't compete with Intel.

Also, SuperPi doesn't need to be optimized because its not a tool to compare different architectures.
The problem is that nothing runs x87 code anymore, so why use it in a leak?

Plus support for it was dropped in BD which is why Stars is faster in Super Pi. The majority of code is SSE in some version which is why I suggested wPrime but there is also y-cruncher.
Posted on Reply
#24
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
by: [H]@RD5TUFF
LOL could you be more transparent, only an AMD fanboy would claim tests to be pointless that make AMD look bad, yet if it looked good for AMD they would be very important.

The chip performs well, very well apparently, deal!
I agree .

Funny how AMD fanboys hand pick a benchmark and say the rest mean nothing! Oh that one is too old or that one doesn't count! GIVE ME A BREAK!
Posted on Reply
#25
GoFigureItOut
I'm not surprised one bit. Even though it's a laptop CPU, it is based on Ivy Bridge. After seeing the score from their Cinebench, I got curious, and decided to test out my machine. My results, a whopping 1.34!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment