Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms Core i7-3615QM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 862 days newer than Core i7-3615QM.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-3615QM
- Consumes up to 57% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 - 45 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 2% better in Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Core i7-3615QM - 228 vs 224 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-3615QM - 20 vs 8 threads
Tom Clancy’s The Division 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Core i7-3615QM
Mobile • Apr 29th, 2012
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i7-3615QM
Mobile • Apr 29th, 2012
Single-Core
549
61.963882618510155%
Multi-Core
1862
34.622536258832284%
Intel Core i7-3615QM | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 29th, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| Core i7 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Haswell |
| Intel BGA 1224 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 4 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
| 2.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
45 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 23.0x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
