A8-5550M vs Atom x5-E3940

A8-5550M vs Atom x5-E3940 Performance Spectrum

A8-5550M

4 / 4

1,811

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom x5-E3940

4 / 4

1,816

+0.3%

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.

A8-5550M vs Atom x5-E3940 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.

A8-5550M vs Atom x5-E3940: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-5550M

2013

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,811 vs 1,816).
❌250% higher power demand at 35W vs 10W.

Atom x5-E3940

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 10W instead of 35W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-E3940 better than A8-5550M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A8-5550M is ahead with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E3940 pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E3940 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x5-E3940 still makes the most sense overall. Atom x5-E3940 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark.

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

Atom x5-E3940 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) 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.

A8-5550M vs Atom x5-E3940 Technical Specifications

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

A8-5550M

The A8-5550M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,811 points. Launch price was $90.

Atom x5-E3940

The Atom x5-E3940 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 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,816 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A8-5550M and Atom x5-E3940 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the A8-5550M versus 1.8 GHz on the Atom x5-E3940 — a 53.1% clock advantage for the A8-5550M (base: 2.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A8-5550M uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom x5-E3940 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A8-5550M scores 1,811 against the Atom x5-E3940's 1,816 — a 0.3% lead for the Atom x5-E3940. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A8-5550M	Atom x5-E3940
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz+72%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+31%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (total)+100%
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
PassMark	1,811	1,816

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-5550M uses the FS1r2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom x5-E3940 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the A8-5550M versus DDR3L-1866 on the Atom x5-E3940 — the Atom x5-E3940 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A8-5550M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A8-5550M) vs 6 (Atom x5-E3940) — the A8-5550M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FP2,FS1r2 (A8-5550M) and Intel FCBGA1296 (Atom x5-E3940).

Feature	A8-5550M	Atom x5-E3940
Socket	FS1r2	FCBGA1296
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	DDR3L-1866+17%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (A8-5550M) / not specified (Atom x5-E3940). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8510G / 8550G (A8-5550M) and Intel HD Graphics 500 (Atom x5-E3940) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A8-5550M rivals Core i3-4000M.