Atom C3538 vs Core i3-4158U

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 C3538 vs Core i3-4158U 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 C3538 vs Core i3-4158U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom C3538

2017

Why buy it

✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 15W instead of 512W, a 497W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,910 vs 1,921).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4158U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-4158U

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Iris Graphics 5100, while Atom C3538 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
❌3313.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3538 better than Core i3-4158U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Atom C3538 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 26 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4158U pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark. Atom C3538 also has the bigger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4158U 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 C3538 still makes the most sense overall. Atom C3538 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 26 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Atom C3538 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2013) and 166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom C3538 vs Core i3-4158U Technical Specifications

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

Atom C3538

The Atom C3538 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2133. Passmark benchmark score: 1,910 points. Launch price was $75.

Core i3-4158U

The Core i3-4158U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,921 points. Launch price was $315.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3538 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-4158U offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Atom C3538 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Atom C3538 versus 2 GHz on the Core i3-4158U — a 4.9% clock advantage for the Atom C3538 (base: 2.1 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Atom C3538 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-4158U uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3538 scores 1,910 against the Core i3-4158U's 1,921 — a 0.6% lead for the Core i3-4158U. L3 cache: 8 MB on the Atom C3538 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4158U.

Feature	Atom C3538	Core i3-4158U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.1 GHz+5%	2 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+5%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB+167%	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	8 MB	256K (per core)+3100%
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,910	1,921
Geekbench 6 Single	—	457

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3538 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4158U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the Atom C3538 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4158U — the Atom C3538 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom C3538 supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 12 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1310 (Atom C3538) and HM86,HM87 (Core i3-4158U).

Feature	Atom C3538	Core i3-4158U
Socket	FCBGA1310	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+33%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB+1500%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	12	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom C3538) / VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Core i3-4158U). The Core i3-4158U includes integrated graphics (Intel Iris Graphics 5100), while the Atom C3538 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4158U targets Multimedia.