OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i5 3610ME Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£200PassMark benchmark result:2694N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:3.3 GHzCPU socket:FCPGA988TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i5 3610ME Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

4.8

Overall score

Score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
Score components

90%

4.8

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 66% of processors
4.8

Technical score

Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Score components

60%

4.7

Performance

18%

4.2

Cache & Architecture

10%

4.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.5

Power & Thermal

4%

6.7

Platform

1%

6.5

Integrated Graphics

â–¼Worse than 63% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
    Loading category ranking...

    Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5 3610ME

    Technical score
    Technical score
    4.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
    When it matters
    When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    4.7

    Performance

    18%

    4.2

    Cache & Architecture

    10%

    4.0

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    6.5

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    6.7

    Platform

    1%

    6.5

    Integrated Graphics

    4.8
    User score
    User score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
    Score components

    70%

    ?

    User ratings

    30%

    ?

    Number of reviews

    ?
    Popularity
    Popularity
    1.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
    Popularity:
    Intel Core i5 3610ME has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
    1.0
    Value for money
    Value for money
    6.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
    When it matters
    When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    4.8

    Overall score

    40%

    9.5

    Price

    6.2
    Brand name
    Intel
    Processor type
    embedded
    Processor type
    embedded
    â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
    This processor belongs to the embedded processor class, which is less advanced than that of 92.7% of processors and equal to that of 7.3% of processors.
    industrial/edge
    CPU socket
    FCPGA988
    CPU socket
    FCPGA988
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This processor uses the FCPGA988 CPU socket, which is older than that of 62.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.9% of processors.
    Chipset
    QM77
    Chipset
    QM77
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor supports QM77 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 64.6% of processors.
    CPU architecture
    x86-64
    CPU architecture
    x86-64
    â–² Better than 2% of models
    This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    2
    N. of physical cores
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 79.3% of processors and equal to 20.6% of processors.
    CPU threads
    4
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 67.4% of processors and equal to 26.5% of processors.
    Threads per core
    2
    Threads per core
    2
    â–² Better than 30% of models
    Market range: <0 – >2.5
    This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.3 GHz
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.3 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.3 GHz which is lower than that of 86.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
    CPU base clock speed
    2x 2.7 GHz
    CPU base clock speed
    2x 2.7 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This processor has a base clock of 2x2.7 GHz which is lower than that of 85.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
    Show more
    Semiconductor size
    22 nm
    Semiconductor size
    22 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor uses a 22 nm process node, which is older than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 10.1% of processors.
    Foundry
    Intel 22 nm
    Foundry
    Intel 22 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    This processor is built on the Intel 22 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 10.1% of processors.
    L3 cache
    3 MB
    L3 cache
    3 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has an L3 cache of 3 MB which is smaller than that of 84.8% of processors and equal to that of 5.6% of processors.
    L2 cache
    0.5 MB
    L2 cache
    0.5 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has an L2 cache of 0.5 MB which is smaller than that of 84.7% of processors and equal to that of 15.3% of processors.
    L1 cache
    128 KB
    L1 cache
    128 KB
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 128 KB which is smaller than that of 83.2% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
    Show more
    DDR memory version
    DDR3/DDR3L
    DDR memory version
    DDR3/DDR3L
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This processor supports DDR DDR3/DDR3L, which is older than that of 86% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
    Maximum memory speed
    1,600 MHz
    Maximum memory speed
    1,600 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,600 MHz, which is lower than that of 87.2% of processors and equal to 11.4% of processors.
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    ?
    Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
    N/A
    Maximum memory capacity
    16 GB
    Maximum memory capacity
    16 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor supports up to 16 GB of memory, which is less than 91.7% of processors and equal to 6.4% of processors.
    Show more
    Integrated graphics
    yes
    Integrated graphics
    yes
    â–² Better than 12% of models
    This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This processor uses the Intel HD Graphics 4000 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 69.5% of processors and equal to that in 2.9% of processors.
    Integrated GPU execution units
    16
    Integrated GPU execution units
    16
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has 16 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 56.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    650 MHz
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    650 MHz
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
    This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 650 MHz which is higher than that of 80.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VC-1 (HW decode)
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VC-1 (HW decode)
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    This processor supports VC-1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 82.1% of processors and equal to 3.6% of processors.
    Show more
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    35 W
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 51.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 15% of processors.
    Boost power (PL2)
    ?
    Tau (power duration limit)
    ?
    Configurable TDP
    no
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
    Show more

    Intel Core i5 3610ME vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
    • 33.3% smaller die size
      Die size
      118 mm²
      â–² Better than 83% of models
      Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
      This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (118 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
      118 mm² vs 177 mm²
    • 5 °C higher TJ Max
      Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
      105 °C
      â–² Better than 84% of models
      Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
      This processor has a higher TJ Max than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C
    • 22.2% lower base power
      Base power (PL1)
      35 W
      â–² Better than 52% of models
      Market range: <15 W – >90 W
      This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      35 W vs 45 W
    • 85.7% higher GPU clock speed
      Integrated GPU base frequency
      650 MHz
      â–² Better than 80% of models
      Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
      This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (650 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
      650 MHz vs 350 MHz
    • 33.3% smaller die size
      Die size
      118 mm²
      â–² Better than 83% of models
      Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
      This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (118 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
      118 mm² vs 177 mm²
    • 85.7% higher GPU clock speed
      Integrated GPU base frequency
      650 MHz
      â–² Better than 80% of models
      Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
      This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (650 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
      650 MHz vs 350 MHz
    • 5 °C higher TJ Max
      Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
      105 °C
      â–² Better than 84% of models
      Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
      This processor has a higher TJ Max than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C
    • 22.2% lower base power
      Base power (PL1)
      35 W
      â–² Better than 52% of models
      Market range: <15 W – >90 W
      This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      35 W vs 45 W
    • 74.5% lower PassMark score
      PassMark benchmark result
      2,694
      â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
      Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (2,694 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
      2,694 vs 10,572.5
    • 4 fewer CPU cores
      N. of physical cores
      2
      â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
      Market range: <2 – >12
      This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      2 vs 6
    • 36% weaker single-core performance
      PassMark single-core benchmark score
      1,599
      â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
      Market range: <1.4k – >4k
      This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,599 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
      1,599 vs 2,500
    • 23.3% lower boost clock
      CPU boost clock speed
      3.3 GHz
      â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
      Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
      This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.3 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
      3.3 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
    • 83.3% larger process node
      Semiconductor size
      22 nm
      â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
      Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
      This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
      22 nm vs 12 nm
    • No configurable TDP
      Configurable TDP
      no
      â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • Less advanced microarchitecture
      Microarchitecture codename
      Ivy Bridge
      â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
      This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake).
      Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake
    • 4 fewer CPU threads
      CPU threads
      4
      â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
      Market range: <4 – >24
      This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
      4 vs 8
    • 6% worse value for money
      Intel Core i5 3610ME has worse value for money than the average processor (6.19 vs 6.6).
      6.19 vs 6.56
    • 8 years older release date
      Release date
      2012
      â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
      Market range: <2k – >2k
      This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2012 vs 2020).
      June 2012
      2012 vs 2020
    • Narrower instruction support
      Instruction sets
      MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C, AES
      â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
      MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
    • No crypto acceleration
      Cryptographic acceleration
      AES
      â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
      This processor does not include crypto acceleration, the average processor does. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
      AES vs AES, SHA
    • 74.5% lower PassMark score
      PassMark benchmark result
      2,694
      â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
      Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (2,694 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
      2,694 vs 10,572.5
    • 4 fewer CPU cores
      N. of physical cores
      2
      â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
      Market range: <2 – >12
      This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      2 vs 6
    • 36% weaker single-core performance
      PassMark single-core benchmark score
      1,599
      â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
      Market range: <1.4k – >4k
      This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,599 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
      1,599 vs 2,500
    • 23.3% lower boost clock
      CPU boost clock speed
      3.3 GHz
      â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
      Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
      This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.3 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
      3.3 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
    • 4 fewer CPU threads
      CPU threads
      4
      â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
      Market range: <4 – >24
      This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
      4 vs 8
    • Lower base clock
      CPU base clock speed
      2 x 2.7 GHz
      â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
      This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x2.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
      2x2.7 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
    • 37.5% lower bus speed
      Bus speed
      5 GT/s
      â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
      Market range: <3 GT/s – >8 GT/s
      This processor has a lower bus speed than the average processor (5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor runs at bus speed of 8 GT/s.
      5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
    • 37.5% lower bus transfer rate
      Bus transfer rate
      5 GT/s
      â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
      Market range: <4 GT/s – >19 GT/s
      This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
      5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
    • 83.3% larger process node
      Semiconductor size
      22 nm
      â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
      Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
      This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
      22 nm vs 12 nm
    • Less advanced microarchitecture
      Microarchitecture codename
      Ivy Bridge
      â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
      This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake).
      Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake
    • 80% smaller L2 cache
      L2 cache
      0.5 MB
      â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
      Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
      This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
      0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
    • 50% less L2 per core
      L2 per core
      0.25 MB/core
      â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
      Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
      This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • 66.7% smaller L1 cache
      L1 cache
      128 KB
      â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
      Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
      This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (128 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
      128 KB vs 384 KB
    • 62.5% smaller L3 cache
      L3 cache
      3 MB
      â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
      Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
      This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (3 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
      3 MB vs 8 MB
    • 12.5% less L3 per core
      L3 per core
      1.5 MB/core
      â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
      Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
      This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
    • Less advanced foundry
      Foundry
      Intel 22 nm
      â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
      This processor uses a less advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
      Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm
    • 44.1% lower memory bandwidth
      Maximum memory bandwidth
      25.6 GB/s
      â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
      Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
      This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (25.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
      25.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
    • 45.4% lower memory speed
      Maximum memory speed
      1,600 MHz
      â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
      Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
      This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1600 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
      1,600 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
    • Older DDR support
      DDR memory version
      DDR3/DDR3L
      â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
      This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3/DDR3L vs DDR4).
      DDR3/DDR3L vs DDR4
    • 75% less memory capacity
      Maximum memory capacity
      16 GB
      â–¼ Worse than 92% of models
      Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
      This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
      16 GB vs 64 GB
    • Limited PCIe bifurcation
      PCIe bifurcation modes
      x16, x8/x8
      â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
      This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
      x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
    • Narrower media codec support
      Integrated media encoders/decoders
      VC-1 (HW decode)
      â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
      This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
      VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
    • Inferior integrated GPU
      Integrated GPU model
      Intel HD Graphics 4000
      â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
      This processor uses an inferior integrated GPU to the average processor (Intel HD Graphics 4000 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
      Intel HD Graphics 4,000 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
    • No configurable TDP
      Configurable TDP
      no
      â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
      CPU temperature
      105 °C
      â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
      Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
      This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C

    Third-party reviews

    What we like about Intel Core i5 3610ME

    • Reliable performance for day-to-day tasks like web browsing, office work, and video calls.
    • High maximum operating temperature of 105°C allows for better thermal resilience in some mobile chassis.
    • Supports Intel Hyper-Threading, providing 4 threads from 2 physical cores for better multitasking than contemporary dual-thread chips.
    • Decent energy efficiency for its era with a 35W TDP, helping with stable power consumption in laptops.
    • Integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000) sufficient for light media tasks without a dedicated GPU.

    What we don't like about Intel Core i5 3610ME

    • Significantly outdated by modern standards and no longer competitive for gaming or high-end productivity.
    • Dual-core architecture struggles with intensive modern software and multitasking compared to current quad-core or 14-core i5 models.
    • Locked multiplier prevents easy overclocking for users seeking additional performance.
    • Noticeable performance lag when running modern operating systems like Windows 11.
    • Limited maximum memory support (16GB) compared to newer generations that support 32GB or more.

    Verdict

    The Intel Core i5-3610ME is a 3rd generation Ivy Bridge dual-core embedded mobile processor featuring 4 threads, a 2.70 GHz base frequency, and a 3.30 GHz max turbo boost. Built on a 22nm lithography with a 35W TDP, it includes 3MB of Smart Cache and integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000 with a 650 MHz base and 950 MHz dynamic frequency. Main pros include its relatively high maximum operating temperature of 105°C for reliability in embedded environments, support for up to 16GB of DDR3/DDR3L-1600 memory, and power-efficient performance compared to contemporary desktop variants. However, it is now an outdated legacy technology with a low core count by modern standards and limited maximum memory capacity of just 16GB.

    Compare Intel Core i5 3610ME with other processors

    1Product to compare no. 1
    VS
    2Product to compare no. 2
    VS
    3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

    Graphic comparison of Intel Core i5 3610ME and other processors

    No results found