Intel Core i7-3635QM performance

[edwhow]

Does this make sense

Intel Core i7-3615QM @ 2.30GHz 7,421 Samsung NP700Z5C-S01UK
Intel Core i7-3630QM @ 2.40GHz 7,640 Toshiba Satellite L855-149 Laptop
Intel Core i7-3635QM @ 2.40GHz 4,688 Samsung NP700Z5C-S03UK

http://ark.intel.com/compare/71459,71460,64900
They look so similar, why is the i7-3635QM so much slower on CPU lookup?

Has anyone else test it?

[David (PassMark)]

My guess is that most of the baselines for the 3635QM were running on battery power. There were also a few duplicate submissions, which I have now deleted.

Samsung seems to be the only manufacturer using this chip.

Considering there is only a model of computer that uses this chip there is a very wide range of results. From 3000 to 8100 on the CPU Mark. So the Samsung NP700Z5C-S03UK can perform well, if it is setup right.

[Rincewind]

My guess is that most of the baselines for the 3635QM were running on battery power. There were also a few duplicate submissions, which I have now deleted.

Samsung seems to be the only manufacturer using this chip.

Considering there is only a model of computer that uses this chip there is a very wide range of results. From 3000 to 8100 on the CPU Mark. So the Samsung NP700Z5C-S03UK can perform well, if it is setup right.

Seems unlikely that anyone would do performance tests on battery.
More important.,
http://uk.hardware.info/productinfo/benchmarks/18/laptopstablets?products[]=159388&specId=7340&tcId=253 and http://uk.hardware.info/productinfo/benchmarks/18/laptopstablets?products[]=174713&specId=7340&tcId=253
benchmark the two Samsung PCs and show a marked difference on CPU related Benchmarks (Gaming is 57 for the S01 and 43 for the S03)
whereas non-cpu critical benchmarks (work, internet) show no difference at all.
Seems odd that Samsung should dumb down the later model.
Hey Ho - thats marketing!!

[David (PassMark)]

Seems unlikely that anyone would do performance tests on battery.
More important.,

You'd be amazed.
We see people running benchmarks in VMs, on Linux under WINE, via remote desktop, with overclocking, with underclocking, on liquid nitrogen, while in ovens temperature cycling, while thermally throttled, while games are running in the background, etc.....

[Rincewind]

You'd be amazed.
We see people running benchmarks in VMs, on Linux under WINE, via remote desktop, with overclocking, with underclocking, on liquid nitrogen, while in ovens temperature cycling, while thermally throttled, while games are running in the background, etc.....

Yes, well I am not really surprised . . . . . but now two 'benchmarks' with a very similar answer. Makes you wonder?
How many bits of bad news does it take?