i7-3517U vs 3015Ce

VS

Aggregate performance score

3015Ce
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.33
+0.8%
Core i7-3517U
2012
2 cores / 4 threads, 17 Watt
1.32

3015Ce outperforms Core i7-3517U by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22502255
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)Intel Core i7
Power efficiency20.897.32
Architecture codenamePollock (Zen) (2020)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date4 August 2020 (4 years ago)3 June 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

3015Ce and Core i7-3517U 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.2 GHz1.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz3 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache192 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache4 MB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data118 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT5FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEIntel® AVX
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

3015Ce and Core i7-3517U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3Intel HD Graphics 4000
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.15 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

3015Ce 1.33
+0.8%
i7-3517U 1.32

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.

3015Ce 2099
+0.6%
i7-3517U 2087

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.33 1.32
Integrated graphics card 2.98 1.18
Recency 4 August 2020 3 June 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 17 Watt

3015Ce has a 0.8% higher aggregate performance score, 152.5% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 8 years, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U.


Should you still have questions on choice between 3015Ce and Core i7-3517U, 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.


AMD 3015Ce
3015Ce
Intel Core i7-3517U
Core i7-3517U

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.


3.2 19 votes

Rate 3015Ce on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 122 votes

Rate Core i7-3517U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about 3015Ce or Core i7-3517U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.