Atom x7405C vs Core i7-3610QE

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Atom x7405C vs Core i7-3610QE FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Atom x7405C vs Core i7-3610QE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Atom x7405C

2024

Why buy it

✅Draws 12W instead of 45W, a 33W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1264 with DDR5 support instead of G2 and older memory support.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-3610QE across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,218 vs 5,234).

Core i7-3610QE

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅77.8% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 9) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $315 MSRP, while Atom x7405C mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌275% higher power demand at 45W vs 12W.
❌Older platform position on G2, while Atom x7405C moves to FCBGA1264 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3610QE better than Atom x7405C?

Yes. Core i7-3610QE is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 18.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-3610QE is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 18.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-3610QE is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i7-3610QE is the better buy right now. Core i7-3610QE comes in at an unclear MSRP at $315 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 18.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Atom x7405C makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2012) and a healthier platform with FCBGA1264 and DDR5 instead of G2. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Atom x7405C vs Core i7-3610QE Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Atom x7405C

The Atom x7405C is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Amston Lake (2024−2025) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1264. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 5,218 points. Launch price was $57.

Core i7-3610QE

The Core i7-3610QE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 April 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: unknown Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 5,234 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom x7405C packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Core i7-3610QE's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Atom x7405C versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3610QE — a 3% clock advantage for the Atom x7405C (base: 1.7 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Atom x7405C uses the Amston Lake (2024−2025) architecture (10 nm), while the Core i7-3610QE uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x7405C scores 5,218 against the Core i7-3610QE's 5,234 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-3610QE. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Atom x7405C vs 6144 kB (total) on the Core i7-3610QE.

Feature	Atom x7405C	Core i7-3610QE
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+3%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	1.7 GHz	2.3 GHz+35%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	6144 kB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB (total)+700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	10 nm-55%	22 nm
Architecture	Amston Lake (2024−2025)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	5,218	5,234

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x7405C uses the FCBGA1264 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Core i7-3610QE uses G2 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800 on the Atom x7405C versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i7-3610QE — the Atom x7405C supports 200% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-3610QE supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom x7405C) vs 2 (Core i7-3610QE). PCIe lanes: 9 (Atom x7405C) vs 16 (Core i7-3610QE) — the Core i7-3610QE offers 7 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Atom x7405C	Core i7-3610QE
Socket	FCBGA1264	G2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800+200%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	32 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	9	16+78%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x7405C) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-3610QE). Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics (Atom x7405C) and HD Graphics 4000 (Core i7-3610QE) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-3610QE targets Mobile.