A6-6400K vs Atom 330

A6-6400K vs Atom 330 Performance Spectrum

A6-6400K

2 / 2

1,511

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom 330

2 / 4

1,530

+1.3%

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.

A6-6400K vs Atom 330 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.

A6-6400K vs Atom 330: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-6400K

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8470D, while Atom 330 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Atom 330.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,511 vs 1,530).
❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.

Atom 330

2008

Why buy it

✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $43 MSRP, while A6-6400K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-6400K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-6400K.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom 330 better than A6-6400K?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-6400K is ahead with a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom 330 pulls ahead with 1.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom 330 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom 330 is the better buy right now. Atom 330 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $43 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that A6-6400K is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (35.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A6-6400K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-6400K vs Atom 330 Technical Specifications

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

A6-6400K

The A6-6400K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,511 points. Launch price was $70.

Atom 330

The Atom 330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Diamondville (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PBGA437. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,530 points. Launch price was $43.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-6400K packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Atom 330's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the A6-6400K versus 0.1 GHz on the Atom 330 — a 190.5% clock advantage for the A6-6400K (base: 3.9 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A6-6400K uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom 330 uses Diamondville (2008−2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A6-6400K scores 1,511 against the Atom 330's 1,530 — a 1.2% lead for the Atom 330. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-6400K	Atom 330
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.1 GHz+4000%	0.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.9 GHz+144%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1024 kB	1 MB
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Diamondville (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,511	1,530+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-6400K uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom 330 uses PBGA437 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1866 on the A6-6400K versus DDR2-533 on the Atom 330 — the A6-6400K supports 250.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-6400K supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (A6-6400K) vs 1 (Atom 330). PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-6400K) vs 0 (Atom 330) — the A6-6400K offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FM2 (A6-6400K) and Intel BGA437 (Atom 330).

Feature	A6-6400K	Atom 330
Socket	FM2	PBGA437
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1866+250%	DDR2-533
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+700%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (A6-6400K) / not specified (Atom 330). The A6-6400K includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8470D), while the Atom 330 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A6-6400K rivals Pentium G3258.