Winner
Intel Core i3 4130
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 4130 based on its performance and single-core performance.
See full details Intel Core i3 4130 vs Atom C2750 |
Released July, 2013
Intel Core i3 4130
- 3.4 GHz
- Dual core
8.9 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i3 4130
 | Much better performance per dollar 7.2 pt/$ | | Significantly higher clock speed 3.4 GHz |
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes |
VS
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2750
- 2.4 GHz
- Octa core
5.1 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Atom C2750
| | More cores 8 | | Significantly lower typical power consumption 16.25W |
| | Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 97 °C | | More threads 8 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4130 vs C2750 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 | |
| 8.9 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Core i3 4130CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better performance per dollar | 7.2 pt/$ | vs | 1.38 pt/$ | Around 5.2x better performance per dollar | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significantly higher clock speed | 3.4 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | More than 40% higher clock speed | |||
| 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 | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,963 | vs | 579 | Around 3.5x better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.47 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better performance per watt | 13.06 pt/W | vs | 11.79 pt/W | More than 10% better performance per watt | |||
| Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.58 GHz | vs | 2.4 GHz | Around 50% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| More cores | 8 | vs | 2 | 6 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 16.25W | vs | 43.88W | 2.7x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature | 97 °C | vs | 72 °C | Around 35% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| More threads | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Slightly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 6,808 | vs | 6,330 | Around 10% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 4.82 $/year | vs | 13.01 $/year | 2.7x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 17.52 $/year | vs | 47.3 $/year | 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 4130 vs Atom C2750
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
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i3 4130 | vs | Atom C2750 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Octa core | |
features | |||
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| EM64T | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 54W | 20W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 13.01 $/year | 4.82 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 47.3 $/year | 17.52 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 13.06 pt/W | 11.79 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 43.88W | 16.25W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | DMI 2.0 | FSB | |
| Number of links | 0 | 1 | |
details | Core i3 4130 | vs | Atom C2750 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 8 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72°C | Unknown - 97°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.47 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.58 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.47 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Intel® HD graphics 4400 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,150 MHz | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3L-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
 Intel Core i3 4130  Report a correction |  Intel Atom C2750 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $98 | $100 | |
| 4130 vs 6300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $70 | |
| 4130 vs G3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $75 | |
| 4130 vs G3250 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $180 | |
| 4130 vs 3470 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $205 | |
| 4130 vs 2400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $70 | |
| 4130 vs G3258 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $98 | $125 | |
| 4130 vs 3220 | ||
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 |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
