Core i7-2617M vs E1-1200

Core i7-2617M vs E1-1200 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-2617M

2 / 4

1,687

+0.3%

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

1,682

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

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.

Core i7-2617M vs E1-1200 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.

Core i7-2617M vs E1-1200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-2617M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 17W instead of 18W, a 1W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while E1-1200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

E1-1200

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,682 vs 1,687).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2617M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-2617M better than E1-1200?

Yes. Core i7-2617M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.8% 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 i7-2617M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.8% 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 i7-2617M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i7-2617M still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-2617M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

E1-1200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-2617M vs E1-1200 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-2617M

The Core i7-2617M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,687 points. Launch price was $100.

E1-1200

The E1-1200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,682 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-2617M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the E1-1200's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core i7-2617M versus 1.4 GHz on the E1-1200 — a 60% clock advantage for the Core i7-2617M. The Core i7-2617M uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the E1-1200 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2617M scores 1,687 against the E1-1200's 1,682 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-2617M. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Core i7-2617M vs 0 kB on the E1-1200.

Feature	Core i7-2617M	E1-1200
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+86%	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	—
L3 Cache	4 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	512K (per core)
Process	32 nm-20%	40 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,687	1,682
Geekbench 6 Single	448	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2617M uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E1-1200 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-2617M	E1-1200
Socket	BGA1023	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2617M) / not specified (E1-1200). The Core i7-2617M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the E1-1200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2617M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: Core i7-2617M rivals A6-3400M.