A10-9620P vs Atom x7213RE

A10-9620P vs Atom x7213RE Performance Spectrum

A10-9620P

4 / 4

2,514

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom x7213RE

2 / 2

2,538

+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.

A10-9620P vs Atom x7213RE 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.

A10-9620P vs Atom x7213RE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A10-9620P

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 2W instead of 9W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,514 vs 2,538).
❌Older platform position on FP4 with DDR4, while Atom x7213RE moves to FCBGA1264 and DDR5.

Atom x7213RE

2024

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1264 with DDR5 support instead of FP4 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-9620P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌350% higher power demand at 9W vs 2W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x7213RE better than A10-9620P?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-9620P is ahead with a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x7213RE 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 x7213RE is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom x7213RE still makes the most sense overall. Atom x7213RE comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark.

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

Atom x7213RE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2017), a healthier platform with FCBGA1264 and DDR5 instead of FP4, and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

A10-9620P vs Atom x7213RE Technical Specifications

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

A10-9620P

The A10-9620P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,514 points. Launch price was $130.

Atom x7213RE

The Atom x7213RE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Amston Lake (2024−2025) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1264. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 2,538 points. Launch price was $42.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-9620P packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Atom x7213RE offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A10-9620P has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A10-9620P versus 3.4 GHz on the Atom x7213RE — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The A10-9620P uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Atom x7213RE uses Amston Lake (2024−2025) (10 nm). In PassMark, the A10-9620P scores 2,514 against the Atom x7213RE's 2,538 — a 1% lead for the Atom x7213RE.

Feature	A10-9620P	Atom x7213RE
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+25%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	—	6 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB	2 MB (total)
Process	28 nm	10 nm-64%
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Amston Lake (2024−2025)
PassMark	2,514	2,538
Geekbench 6 Single	485	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-9620P uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom x7213RE uses FCBGA1264 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-1866 on the A10-9620P versus DDR5-4800 on the Atom x7213RE — the Atom x7213RE supports 157.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10-9620P supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (A10-9620P) vs 1 (Atom x7213RE). PCIe lanes: 8 (A10-9620P) vs 9 (Atom x7213RE) — the Atom x7213RE offers 1 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A10-9620P	Atom x7213RE
Socket	FP4	FCBGA1264
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-1866	DDR5-4800+157%
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+300%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	8	9+13%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-9620P) / not specified (Atom x7213RE). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R5 (A10-9620P) and Intel UHD Graphics (16EU) (Atom x7213RE) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-9620P targets Laptop. Direct competitor: A10-9620P rivals Core i3-7100U.