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!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel E3940

Reasons to consider the
Intel E3940

Report a correction
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
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 3,564 vs 2,292 More than 55% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Lower typical power consumption 7.72W vs 16.25W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 6.52 pt/W vs 4.02 pt/W More than 60% better performance per watt
Newer Oct, 2016 vs Jul, 2013 Release date over 3 years later
Lower annual home energy cost 2.29 $/year vs 4.82 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 8.32 $/year vs 17.52 $/year 2.1x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Atom C2758

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2758

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 52,100 MB/s vs 868.7 MB/s Around 60x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Significantly higher clock speed 2.4 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 50% higher clock speed
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads

Benchmarks Real world tests of E3940 vs Atom C2758

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3940
3,564
Atom C2758
2,292

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3940
1,086

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3940
868.7 MB/s
Atom C2758
52,100 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

E3940  vs
Atom C2758 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
EM64T
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3
Channels Quad Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 65,536 MB

details

E3940  vs
Atom C2758 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
Manufacture process 14 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 500 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 400 MHz N/A

power consumption

TDP 9.5W 20W
Annual home energy cost 2.29 $/year 4.82 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.32 $/year 17.52 $/year
Performance per watt 6.52 pt/W 4.02 pt/W
Typical power consumption 7.72W 16.25W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel E3940
Report a correction
Intel Atom C2758
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus