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

Intel E3950

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel E3950

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel E3950

Reasons to consider the
Intel E3950

Report a correction
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
Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz vs 1.33 GHz More than 20% higher clock speed
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 3,964 vs 1,018 Around 4x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Better PassMark (Single core) score 709 vs 279 More than 2.5x better PassMark (Single core) score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Newer Oct, 2016 vs Oct, 2013 Release date over 3 years later
Better performance per watt 6.15 pt/W vs 4.24 pt/W More than 45% better performance per watt
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Front view of Intel Atom E3825

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom E3825

Report a correction
Higher Maximum operating temperature 110 °C vs 98 °C More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower typical power consumption 4.88W vs 9.75W 2x lower typical power consumption
Slightly higher GPU clock speed 533 MHz vs 500 MHz More than 5% higher GPU clock speed
Lower annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year vs 2.89 $/year 2x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year vs 10.51 $/year 2x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of E3950 vs Atom E3825

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3950
3,964
Atom E3825
1,018

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3950
1,201

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E3950
972.3 MB/s
Atom E3825
197.9 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

E3950
2,034

PassMark (Single Core)

E3950
709

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

E3950  vs
Atom E3825 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 1.33 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
AES
EM64T
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
DDR3L-1066
Channels Quad Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 8,192 MB

details

E3950  vs
Atom E3825 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
Manufacture process 14 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 98°C -40 - 110°C

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 505 HD
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 500 MHz 533 MHz

power consumption

TDP 12W 6W
Annual home energy cost 2.89 $/year 1.45 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 10.51 $/year 5.26 $/year
Performance per watt 6.15 pt/W 4.24 pt/W
Typical power consumption 9.75W 4.88W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel E3950
Report a correction
Intel Atom E3825
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus