Atom C3758 vs Xeon L5640

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 C3758 vs Xeon L5640 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 C3758 vs Xeon L5640: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom C3758

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 25W instead of 60W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (4,614 vs 4,659).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon L5640, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon L5640

2010

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom C3758 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $996 MSRP, while Atom C3758 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌140% higher power demand at 60W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3758 better than Xeon L5640?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon L5640 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Atom C3758 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon L5640 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Atom C3758 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon L5640 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Atom C3758 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $996 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon L5640 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1% better PassMark. Xeon L5640 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Atom C3758 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2010) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom C3758 vs Xeon L5640 Technical Specifications

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

Atom C3758

The Atom C3758 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 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2400. Passmark benchmark score: 4,614 points. Launch price was $193.

Xeon L5640

The Xeon L5640 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.26 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 60 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,659 points. Launch price was $200.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3758 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon L5640 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Atom C3758 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Atom C3758 versus 2.8 GHz on the Xeon L5640 — a 24% clock advantage for the Xeon L5640 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.26 GHz). The Atom C3758 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon L5640 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3758 scores 4,614 against the Xeon L5640's 4,659 — a 1% lead for the Xeon L5640. L3 cache: 16 MB on the Atom C3758 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon L5640.

Feature	Atom C3758	Xeon L5640
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+33%	6 / 12
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	2.8 GHz+27%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.26 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	16 MB+33%	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	16 MB+6300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	4,614	4,659
Geekbench 6 Single	400	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	2,400	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3758 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon L5640 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Atom C3758 versus DDR3 1333 MHz on the Xeon L5640 — the Atom C3758 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon L5640 supports up to 288 GB of RAM compared to 256 GB — 12.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Atom C3758) vs 3 (Xeon L5640). PCIe lanes: 16 (Atom C3758) vs 0 (Xeon L5640) — the Atom C3758 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Atom C3758) and Intel 5520,Intel X58 (Xeon L5640).

Feature	Atom C3758	Xeon L5640
Socket	FCBGA1310	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+80%	DDR3 1333 MHz
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	288 GB+13%
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Atom C3758) vs true (Xeon L5640). Primary use case: Atom C3758 targets Server/Embedded, Xeon L5640 targets Server Low Power.