Atom C3708 vs PRO A12-9800

Atom C3708 vs PRO A12-9800 Performance Spectrum

Atom C3708

8 / 8

3,750

0.0%

3,751

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 C3708 vs PRO A12-9800 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 C3708 vs PRO A12-9800: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom C3708

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,750 vs 3,751).

PRO A12-9800

2016

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom C3708 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $110 MSRP, while Atom C3708 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3708 better than PRO A12-9800?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Atom C3708 is ahead with a 7.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, PRO A12-9800 pulls ahead with 0% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, PRO A12-9800 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom C3708 is still the better call for a fresh build. Atom C3708 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $110 MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. PRO A12-9800 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 3,751 PassMark with 4 cores and 4 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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

Atom C3708 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom C3708 vs PRO A12-9800 Technical Specifications

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

Atom C3708

The Atom C3708 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 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,750 points. Launch price was $209.

PRO A12-9800

The PRO A12-9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 October 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,751 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3708 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the PRO A12-9800 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Atom C3708 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.7 GHz on the Atom C3708 versus 4.2 GHz on the PRO A12-9800 — a 84.7% clock advantage for the PRO A12-9800 (base: 1.7 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Atom C3708 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the PRO A12-9800 uses Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3708 scores 3,750 against the PRO A12-9800's 3,751 — a 0% lead for the PRO A12-9800.

Feature	Atom C3708	PRO A12-9800
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+100%	4 / 4
Boost Clock	1.7 GHz	4.2 GHz+147%
Base Clock	1.7 GHz	3.8 GHz+124%
L3 Cache	16 MB	—
L2 Cache	16 MB+700%	2048 kB
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	3,750	3,751

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3708 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the PRO A12-9800 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.