A10 Pro-7350B vs Atom x7-E3950

A10 Pro-7350B vs Atom x7-E3950 Performance Spectrum

A10 Pro-7350B

4 / 4

1,862

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom x7-E3950

4 / 4

1,864

+0.1%

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 Pro-7350B vs Atom x7-E3950 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 Pro-7350B vs Atom x7-E3950: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A10 Pro-7350B

2014

Why buy it

✅+16.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 4W instead of 12W, a 8W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,862 vs 1,864).

Atom x7-E3950

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (245 vs 286).
❌200% higher power demand at 12W vs 4W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x7-E3950 better than A10 Pro-7350B?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10 Pro-7350B is ahead with a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x7-E3950 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x7-E3950 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x7-E3950 still makes the most sense overall. Atom x7-E3950 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% better PassMark.

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

Atom x7-E3950 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2014) 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 Pro-7350B vs Atom x7-E3950 Technical Specifications

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

A10 Pro-7350B

The A10 Pro-7350B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 June 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 MB. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,862 points. Launch price was $69.

Atom x7-E3950

The Atom x7-E3950 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,864 points. Launch price was $57.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A10 Pro-7350B and Atom x7-E3950 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the A10 Pro-7350B versus 2 GHz on the Atom x7-E3950 — a 49.1% clock advantage for the A10 Pro-7350B (base: 2.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A10 Pro-7350B uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Atom x7-E3950 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A10 Pro-7350B scores 1,862 against the Atom x7-E3950's 1,864 — a 0.1% lead for the Atom x7-E3950. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 286 vs 245, a 15.4% lead for the A10 Pro-7350B that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A10 Pro-7350B	Atom x7-E3950
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz+65%	2 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+31%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	4096 kB+100%	2 MB (total)
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Kaveri (2014−2015)	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
PassMark	1,862	1,864
Geekbench 6 Single	286+17%	245

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10 Pro-7350B uses the FP3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom x7-E3950 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A10 Pro-7350B versus LPDDR4-2400 on the Atom x7-E3950 — the Atom x7-E3950 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10 Pro-7350B supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (A10 Pro-7350B) vs 4 (Atom x7-E3950). PCIe lanes: 8 (A10 Pro-7350B) vs 6 (Atom x7-E3950) — the A10 Pro-7350B offers 2 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A10 Pro-7350B	Atom x7-E3950
Socket	FP3	FCBGA1296
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	LPDDR4-2400+50%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	8+33%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A10 Pro-7350B) vs VT-x, VT-d (Atom x7-E3950). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R6 (A10 Pro-7350B) and HD Graphics 505 (Atom x7-E3950) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10 Pro-7350B targets Business Laptop. Direct competitor: A10 Pro-7350B rivals Core i5-4300U.