Intel Atom C2518 vs 3855U |
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2518
- 1.7 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Atom C2518
 | More cores 4 | | More threads 4 |
VS
Released October, 2015
Intel 3855U
- 1.6 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the 3855U
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes |
| | Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm | | Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score 1,758 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
| Significantly newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 22 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score | 1,758 | vs | 769 | More than 2.2x better geekbench 3 single core score | |||
| Significantly better performance per dollar | 0.72 pt/$ | vs | 0.46 pt/$ | More than 55% better performance per dollar | |||
| Better performance per watt | 5.17 pt/W | vs | 3.24 pt/W | Around 60% better performance per watt | |||
| Newer | Oct, 2015 | vs | Jul, 2013 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 2,869 | vs | 2,369 | More than 20% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Atom C2518 vs 3855U
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Atom C2518 | vs | 3855U |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | No | Yes | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1866 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| LPDDR3-1600 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | No | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 32,768 MB | 32,768 MB | |
details | Atom C2518 | vs | 3855U |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 14 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 510 | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 300 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 900 MHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 13W | 15W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 3.13 $/year | 3.61 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 11.39 $/year | 13.14 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.24 pt/W | 5.17 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 10.56W | 12.19W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
 Intel Atom C2518  Report a correction |  Intel 3855U Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $281 | $107 | |
| 6100U vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $82 | $107 | |
| J1900 vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | $107 | |
| N3050 vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | ||
| J3455 vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | ||
| J3160 vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $107 | |
| 4405U vs 3855U | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | $107 | |
| 3205U vs 3855U | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
