Intel Pentium N3700 vs Atom C2358 |
Released January, 2015
Intel Pentium N3700
- 1.6 GHz
- Quad core
- Unlocked
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium N3700
 | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes |
| | Higher turbo clock speed 2.4 GHz | | Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm |
VS
Released July, 2013
Intel Atom C2358
- 1.7 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Atom C2358
| | Significantly better performance per dollar 0.75 pt/$ |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| 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 | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 2.4 GHz | vs | 2 GHz | Around 20% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Significantly newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 22 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much better performance per watt | 12.34 pt/W | vs | 6.4 pt/W | Around 95% better performance per watt | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.4 GHz | vs | 1.7 GHz | More than 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2015 | vs | Jul, 2013 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly better performance per dollar | 0.75 pt/$ | vs | 0.46 pt/$ | More than 60% better performance per dollar | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium N3700 vs Atom C2358
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium N3700 | vs | Atom C2358 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 6W | 7W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 1.45 $/year | 1.69 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 5.26 $/year | 6.13 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 12.34 pt/W | 6.4 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 4.88W | 5.69W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | Pentium N3700 | vs | Atom C2358 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| Manufacture process | 14 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.6 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.4 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 400 MHz | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3L-1600 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Single Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 6,400 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 8,192 MB | 16,384 MB | |
 Intel Pentium N3700  Report a correction |  Intel Atom C2358 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $281 | |
| N3700 vs 5200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $281 | |
| N3700 vs 5010U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $107 | |
| N3700 vs N3050 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3700 vs 5005U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $161 | |
| N3700 vs N3540 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3700 vs 4005U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | ||
| N3700 vs N3710 | ||
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 |  |
| $248 | $230 | |
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
