Celeron 2955U vs i7-3610QM

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-3610QM
2012
4 cores / 8 threads, 45 Watt
3.22
+485%
Celeron 2955U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.55

Core i7-3610QM outperforms Celeron 2955U by a whopping 485% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking16072844
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7Intel Celeron
Power efficiency6.773.47
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Haswell (2013−2015)
Release date29 April 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$378no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed2.3 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz1.4 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/s5 GT/s
L1 cache64K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm22 nm
Die size160 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors1,400 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCPGA988FCBGA1168
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data+
FDI+-
Fast Memory Access+no data
AMTno data9.5
Matrix Storageno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data+

Security technologies

Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Key++
Identity Protection+-
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theft+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d--
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 4000Intel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel Processors
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHz1 GHz
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes1610
PCI supportno data-
USB revisionno data3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Integrated IDEno data-
Number of USB portsno data4
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-3610QM 3.22
+485%
Celeron 2955U 0.55

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i7-3610QM 5122
+482%
Celeron 2955U 880

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

i7-3610QM 535
+101%
Celeron 2955U 266

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

i7-3610QM 1831
+302%
Celeron 2955U 455

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i7-3610QM 4420
+114%
Celeron 2955U 2069

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i7-3610QM 17230
+331%
Celeron 2955U 4000

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i7-3610QM 6078
+300%
Celeron 2955U 1520

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

i7-3610QM 8.72
+510%
Celeron 2955U 53.2

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i7-3610QM 6
+444%
Celeron 2955U 1

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

i7-3610QM 1.36
+123%
Celeron 2955U 0.61

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i7-3610QM 3.1
+2285%
Celeron 2955U 0.1

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

i7-3610QM 4313
+309%
Celeron 2955U 1054

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

i7-3610QM 34
+356%
Celeron 2955U 8

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

i7-3610QM 135
+232%
Celeron 2955U 41

Geekbench 2

i7-3610QM 9493
+249%
Celeron 2955U 2720

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.22 0.55
Integrated graphics card 1.18 0.77
Recency 29 April 2012 1 September 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 15 Watt

i7-3610QM has a 485.5% higher aggregate performance score, 53.2% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Celeron 2955U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-3610QM is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 2955U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3610QM and Celeron 2955U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-3610QM
Core i7-3610QM
Intel Celeron 2955U
Celeron 2955U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 408 votes

Rate Core i7-3610QM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 67 votes

Rate Celeron 2955U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-3610QM or Celeron 2955U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.