Winner
Intel Atom C2358
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom C2358 based on its value.
See full details Intel Atom C2518 vs C2358 |
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2518
- 1.7 GHz
- Quad core
4.6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Atom C2518
 | More cores 4 | | More threads 4 |
| | Supports more RAM 32,768 MB |
VS
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2358
- 1.7 GHz
- Dual core
4.9 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the C2358
| | Much better performance per watt 6.4 pt/W | | Slightly lower typical power consumption 5.69W |
| | Slightly lower annual home energy cost 1.69 $/year | | Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost 6.13 $/year |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of C2518 vs C2358 among all CPUs
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 4.9 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
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 | |||
| Supports more RAM | 32,768 MB | vs | 16,384 MB | Supports 2x more RAM | |||
| |||||||
| Much better performance per watt | 6.4 pt/W | vs | 3.24 pt/W | More than 95% better performance per watt | |||
| Slightly lower typical power consumption | 5.69W | vs | 10.56W | More than 45% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Slightly lower annual home energy cost | 1.69 $/year | vs | 3.13 $/year | More than 45% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost | 6.13 $/year | vs | 11.39 $/year | More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the Atom C2518 vs C2358
clock speed
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Atom C2518 | vs | C2358 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | No | No | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Single Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 6,400 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 32,768 MB | 16,384 MB | |
details | Atom C2518 | vs | C2358 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | None | |
| Label | N/A | N/A | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| 3DMark06 | N/A | N/A | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 13W | 7W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 3.13 $/year | 1.69 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 11.39 $/year | 6.13 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.24 pt/W | 6.4 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 10.56W | 5.69W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
 Intel Atom C2518  Report a correction |  Intel Atom C2358 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $60 | ||
| C2358 vs GX-415GA | ||
| | VS |  |
| $60 | $82 | |
| C2358 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $60 | $63 | |
| C2358 vs D525 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $60 | $47 | |
| C2358 vs D2550 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $60 | $104 | |
| C2358 vs C2558 | ||
 | VS | |
| $91 | $82 | |
| C2518 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $91 | $300 | |
| C2518 vs 2500 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS | |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
