A8-3550MX vs Atom Z2760

A8-3550MX vs Atom Z2760 Performance Spectrum

A8-3550MX

4 / 4

1,687

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom Z2760

2 / 4

1,697

+0.6%

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.

A8-3550MX 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.

A8-3550MX 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.

A8-3550MX

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,687 vs 1,697).
❌1400% higher power demand at 45W vs 3W.

Atom Z2760

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 3W instead of 45W, a 42W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom Z2760 better than A8-3550MX?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A8-3550MX is ahead with a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom Z2760 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom Z2760 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom Z2760 still makes the most sense overall. Atom Z2760 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark.

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

Atom Z2760 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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.

A8-3550MX vs Atom Z2760 Technical Specifications

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

A8-3550MX

The A8-3550MX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,687 points. Launch price was $90.

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 A8-3550MX packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Atom Z2760 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A8-3550MX has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the A8-3550MX versus 1.8 GHz on the Atom Z2760 — a 40% clock advantage for the A8-3550MX (base: 2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The A8-3550MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom Z2760 uses Cloverview (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A8-3550MX scores 1,687 against the Atom Z2760's 1,697 — a 0.6% lead for the Atom Z2760. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A8-3550MX	Atom Z2760
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+50%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+11%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Cloverview (2012)
PassMark	1,687	1,697
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-3550MX uses the FS1 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 A8-3550MX versus LPDDR2-800 on the Atom Z2760 — the A8-3550MX supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A8-3550MX supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (A8-3550MX) vs 0 (Atom Z2760) — the A8-3550MX offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A8-3550MX	Atom Z2760
Socket	FS1	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	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A8-3550MX) / not specified (Atom Z2760). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6620G (A8-3550MX) and Intel GMA 3650 (Atom Z2760) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-3550MX targets High Performance Laptop. Direct competitor: A8-3550MX rivals Core i5-2540M.