CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3217U vs Z2760


Benchmark performance using all cores

3DMark06 (CPU), Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?



How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Features

Intel Atom Z2760 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom Z2760  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
Front view of Intel Atom Z2760

Intel Atom Z2760

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 3217U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3217U

Report a correction
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Better 3DMark06 CPU score 2,229 vs 945 More than 2.2x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Better PassMark score 2,290 vs 679 More than 3.2x better PassMark score
Better geekbench (32-bit) score 2,895 vs 1,043 More than 2.8x better geekbench (32-bit) score
Front view of Intel Atom Z2760

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom Z2760

Report a correction
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 63.39 pt/W vs 19.63 pt/W Around 3.2x better performance per watt
Lower typical power consumption 1.63W vs 13.81W 8.5x lower typical power consumption
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better performance per dollar 3.09 pt/$ vs 1.53 pt/$ More than 2x better performance per dollar
Lower annual home energy cost 0.48 $/year vs 4.1 $/year 8.5x lower annual home energy cost
Newer Sep, 2012 vs Jun, 2012 Release date 3 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3217U vs Atom Z2760

GeekBench (32-bit)


Specifications Full list of technical specs


Core i3 3217U  vs
Atom Z2760 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 1.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Is hyperthreaded Yes Yes


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 17W 2W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 0.48 $/year
Performance per watt 19.63 pt/W 63.39 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 1.63W


Architecture DMI 2.0 FSB
Number of links 1 1


Core i3 3217U  vs
Atom Z2760 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1


Label Intel® HD Graphics 4000 Integrated
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 533 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Intel Core i3 3217U
Report a correction
Intel Atom Z2760
Report a correction

Read more


Showing 1 comment.
But did you run the benchmarks on the i3 on a 64-bit OS so that you can see what the REAL top performance of the chip is? Performance per $, etc.
comments powered by Disqus