A12-9700P vs Atom C3558

A12-9700P vs Atom C3558 Performance Spectrum

A12-9700P

4 / 4

2,415

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom C3558

4 / 4

2,431

+0.7%

Core i3-4010Y

Celeron Dual-Core T1500

Pentium Dual Core T2410

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.

A12-9700P vs Atom C3558 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.

A12-9700P vs Atom C3558: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A12-9700P

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 16W, a 14W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Atom C3558 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,415 vs 2,431).

Atom C3558

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅50% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌700% higher power demand at 16W vs 2W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9700P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3558 better than A12-9700P?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A12-9700P is ahead with a 0.4% average FPS lead across 45 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom C3558 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom C3558 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom C3558 still makes the most sense overall. Atom C3558 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark.

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

Atom C3558 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016) 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.

A12-9700P vs Atom C3558 Technical Specifications

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

A12-9700P

The A12-9700P 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: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,415 points. Launch price was $130.

Atom C3558

The Atom C3558 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 16 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2133. Passmark benchmark score: 2,431 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A12-9700P and Atom C3558 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A12-9700P versus 2.2 GHz on the Atom C3558 — a 42.9% clock advantage for the A12-9700P (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The A12-9700P uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Atom C3558 uses Goldmont (2016−2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A12-9700P scores 2,415 against the Atom C3558's 2,431 — a 0.7% lead for the Atom C3558.

Feature	A12-9700P	Atom C3558
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+55%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+14%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	—	8 MB
L2 Cache	2048 kB	8 MB+300%
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Goldmont (2016−2017)
PassMark	2,415	2,431
Geekbench 6 Single	481	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A12-9700P uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom C3558 uses FCBGA1310 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-1866 on the A12-9700P versus DDR4-2133 on the Atom C3558 — the Atom C3558 supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom C3558 supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A12-9700P) vs 12 (Atom C3558) — the Atom C3558 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A12-9700P	Atom C3558
Socket	FP4	FCBGA1310
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-1866	DDR4-2133+14%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	256 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	8	12+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A12-9700P) / not specified (Atom C3558). The A12-9700P includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Atom C3558 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A12-9700P targets Laptop. Direct competitor: A12-9700P rivals Core i5-6200U.