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 N3160

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel N3160

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel N3160

Reasons to consider the
Intel N3160

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
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
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much better performance per watt 9.3 pt/W vs 2.16 pt/W More than 4.2x better performance per watt
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Newer Jan, 2016 vs Sep, 2011 Release date over 4 years later
Better PassMark (Single core) score 497 vs 290 More than 70% better PassMark (Single core) score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Better PassMark score 1,707 vs 406 Around 4.2x better PassMark score
Front view of Intel Atom D2500

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom D2500

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 1.86 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 15% higher clock speed
Higher GPU clock speed 400 MHz vs 320 MHz 25% higher GPU clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.87 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.87 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of N3160 vs Atom D2500

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

N3160
2,964

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

N3160
898

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

N3160
364.4 MB/s
Atom D2500
29.2 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

N3160
1,707

PassMark (Single Core)

N3160
497

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

N3160  vs
Atom D2500 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 1.86 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 6W 10W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 2.41 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 8.76 $/year
Performance per watt 9.3 pt/W 2.16 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 8.13W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1

details

N3160  vs
Atom D2500 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.6 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.6 GHz 1.87 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 400 Integrated
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 320 MHz 400 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1066
DDR3-800
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 8,533.33 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 4,096 MB
Intel N3160
Report a correction
Intel Atom D2500
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus