Atom 230 vs C-30

Atom 230 vs C-30 Performance Spectrum

Atom 230

1 / 2

248

+23.4%

201

0.0%

Ryzen 7 4700GE

Ryzen 9 5900X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

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.

Atom 230 vs C-30 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.

Atom 230 vs C-30: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom 230

2008

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +20.0% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 4W instead of 512W, a 508W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while C-30 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

C-30

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6250, while Atom 230 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom 230 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (201 vs 248).
❌Launch MSRP is still $50 MSRP, while Atom 230 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌12700% higher power demand at 512W vs 4W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom 230 better than C-30?

Yes. Atom 230 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 20.0% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data and 23.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Atom 230 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 20.0% more average FPS across 49 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom 230 is the stronger fit. You are getting 23.4% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom 230 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Atom 230 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $50 MSRP, and it still gives you a 20.0% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. C-30 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 20.0% in the shared gaming data.

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

C-30 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom 230 vs C-30 Technical Specifications

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

Atom 230

The Atom 230 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Silverthorne (2008−2010) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PBGA437. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 248 points. Launch price was $29.

C-30

The C-30 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 201 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom 230 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, matching the C-30's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 0.1 GHz on the Atom 230 versus 1.2 GHz on the C-30 — a 169.2% clock advantage for the C-30. The Atom 230 uses the Silverthorne (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the C-30 uses Ontario (2011−2012) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Atom 230 scores 248 against the C-30's 201 — a 20.9% lead for the Atom 230. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom 230	C-30
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	1 / 1
Boost Clock	0.1 GHz	1.2 GHz+1100%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB
Process	45 nm	40 nm-11%
Architecture	Silverthorne (2008−2010)	Ontario (2011−2012)
PassMark	248+23%	201

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom 230 uses the PBGA437 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the C-30 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-533 on the Atom 230 versus DDR3-1066 on the C-30 — the C-30 supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The C-30 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom 230) vs 4 (C-30) — the C-30 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel BGA437 (Atom 230) and AMD BGA413 (C-30).

Feature	Atom 230	C-30
Socket	PBGA437	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-533	DDR3-1066+100%
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	4