Intel E3-1565LV5 vs Atom C2550 |
Released April, 2016
Intel E3-1565LV5
- 2.5 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel E3-1565LV5
 | Significantly higher turbo clock speed 3.5 GHz | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | | Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm |
VS
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2550
- 2.4 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Atom C2550
| | Lower typical power consumption 11.38W | | Lower annual home energy cost 3.37 $/year |
| | Lower annual commercial energy cost 12.26 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 3.5 GHz | vs | 2.6 GHz | Around 35% higher turbo 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 | |||
| Significantly newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 22 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| More threads | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Newer | Apr, 2016 | vs | Jul, 2013 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| |||||||
| Lower typical power consumption | 11.38W | vs | 28.44W | 2.5x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 3.37 $/year | vs | 8.43 $/year | 2.5x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 12.26 $/year | vs | 30.66 $/year | 2.5x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the E3-1565LV5 vs Atom C2550
clock speed
turbo clock speed
TDP
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | E3-1565LV5 | vs | Atom C2550 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 2.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad 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 | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 65,536 MB | 65,536 MB | |
details | E3-1565LV5 | vs | Atom C2550 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 8 | 4 | |
| Manufacture process | 14 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Intel® Iris™ Pro Graphics P580 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,050 MHz | N/A | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 35W | 14W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 3.37 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 12.26 $/year | |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 11.38W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 0 | 1 | |
 Intel E3-1565LV5  Report a correction |  Intel Atom C2550 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $86 | $171 | |
| C2550 vs C2750 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $98 | |
| C2550 vs 4130 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $281 | |
| C2550 vs 5200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $82 | |
| C2550 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $208 | |
| C2550 vs C2758 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $104 | |
| C2550 vs C2558 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $86 | $104 | |
| C2550 vs C2538 | ||
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 | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $248 | $230 | |
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
