A4 PRO-3340B vs Atom Z2760

A4 PRO-3340B vs Atom Z2760 Performance Spectrum

A4 PRO-3340B

4 / 4

1,709

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom Z2760

2 / 4

1,697

0.0%

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.

A4 PRO-3340B vs Atom Z2760 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.

A4 PRO-3340B vs Atom Z2760: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4 PRO-3340B

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌733.3% higher power demand at 25W vs 3W.

Atom Z2760

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 25W, a 22W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A4 PRO-3340B across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,697 vs 1,709).

Quick Answers

So, is A4 PRO-3340B better than Atom Z2760?

Yes. A4 PRO-3340B is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4 PRO-3340B is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4 PRO-3340B 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?

A4 PRO-3340B still makes the most sense overall. A4 PRO-3340B comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4 PRO-3340B makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4 PRO-3340B vs Atom Z2760 Technical Specifications

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

A4 PRO-3340B

The A4 PRO-3340B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 December 2014 (10 years ago). It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3/DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,709 points. Launch price was $69.

Atom Z2760

The Atom Z2760 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Cloverview (2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FC-MB4760. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,697 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4 PRO-3340B packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Atom Z2760 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A4 PRO-3340B has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the A4 PRO-3340B versus 1.8 GHz on the Atom Z2760 — a 20% clock advantage for the A4 PRO-3340B (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The A4 PRO-3340B uses the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Atom Z2760 uses Cloverview (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4 PRO-3340B scores 1,709 against the Atom Z2760's 1,697 — a 0.7% lead for the A4 PRO-3340B.

Feature	A4 PRO-3340B	Atom Z2760
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz+22%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+22%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	2048 kB+300%	512K (per core)
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Kabini (2013−2014)	Cloverview (2012)
PassMark	1,709	1,697
Geekbench 6 Single	200	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4 PRO-3340B uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Atom Z2760 uses FC-MB4760 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4 PRO-3340B versus LPDDR2-800 on the Atom Z2760 — the A4 PRO-3340B supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4 PRO-3340B supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4 PRO-3340B) vs 2 (Atom Z2760). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4 PRO-3340B) vs 0 (Atom Z2760) — the A4 PRO-3340B offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4 PRO-3340B	Atom Z2760
Socket	FT3	FC-MB4760
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+100%	LPDDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+700%	2 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A4 PRO-3340B) / not specified (Atom Z2760). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8240 (A4 PRO-3340B) and Intel GMA 3650 (Atom Z2760) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4 PRO-3340B targets Business Laptop. Direct competitor: A4 PRO-3340B rivals Pentium N3520.