A10-6800K vs Atom x5-E8000

A10-6800K vs Atom x5-E8000 Performance Spectrum

A10-6800K

4 / 4

3,186

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom x5-E8000

4 / 4

3,219

+1.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A10-6800K vs Atom x5-E8000 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-6800K vs Atom x5-E8000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-6800K

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Atom x5-E8000.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,186 vs 3,219).
❌1900% higher power demand at 100W vs 5W.

Atom x5-E8000

2016

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 5W instead of 100W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-6800K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $18 MSRP, while A10-6800K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-6800K.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-E8000 better than A10-6800K?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-6800K is ahead with a 6.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E8000 pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E8000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Atom x5-E8000 is the better buy right now. Atom x5-E8000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $18 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. The compromise is that A10-6800K is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 6.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (178.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Atom x5-E8000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-6800K vs Atom x5-E8000 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-6800K

The A10-6800K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,186 points. Launch price was $142.

Atom x5-E8000

The Atom x5-E8000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 February 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.04 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,219 points. Launch price was $39.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A10-6800K and Atom x5-E8000 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the A10-6800K versus 1.04 GHz on the Atom x5-E8000 — a 123.5% clock advantage for the A10-6800K. The A10-6800K uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom x5-E8000 uses Cherry Trail (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A10-6800K scores 3,186 against the Atom x5-E8000's 3,219 — a 1% lead for the Atom x5-E8000. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A10-6800K	Atom x5-E8000
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+323%	1.04 GHz
Base Clock	4.1 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	4096 kB+100%	2 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Cherry Trail (2015−2016)
PassMark	3,186	3,219+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	477	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-2133 on the A10-6800K versus DDR3L-1600 on the Atom x5-E8000 — the A10-6800K supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10-6800K supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A10-6800K) vs 4 (Atom x5-E8000) — the A10-6800K offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X (A10-6800K) and Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom x5-E8000).

Feature	A10-6800K	Atom x5-E8000
Socket	FM2	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-2133+33%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-6800K) / not specified (Atom x5-E8000). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8670D (A10-6800K) and Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) (Atom x5-E8000) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-6800K targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-6800K rivals Core i3-4130.