Atom C3808 vs Core i7-3615QE

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 C3808 vs Core i7-3615QE 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 C3808 vs Core i7-3615QE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom C3808

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Draws 25W instead of 45W, a 20W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

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

Core i7-3615QE

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom C3808 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,617 vs 5,671).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $400 MSRP, while Atom C3808 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌80% higher power demand at 45W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3808 better than Core i7-3615QE?

Yes. Atom C3808 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 12.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Atom C3808 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 12.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom C3808 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Atom C3808 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Atom C3808 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $400 MSRP, and it still gives you a 12.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-3615QE 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 12.6% in the shared gaming data.

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

Atom C3808 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012), 100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 12 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom C3808 vs Core i7-3615QE Technical Specifications

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

Atom C3808

The Atom C3808 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 12 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB. L2 cache: 12 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2133. Passmark benchmark score: 5,671 points. Launch price was $369.

Core i7-3615QE

The Core i7-3615QE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 April 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: unknown Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 5,617 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3808 packs 12 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-3615QE offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Atom C3808 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom C3808 versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3615QE — a 49.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-3615QE (base: 2 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Atom C3808 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3615QE uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3808 scores 5,671 against the Core i7-3615QE's 5,617 — a 1% lead for the Atom C3808. L3 cache: 12 MB on the Atom C3808 vs 6144 kB (total) on the Core i7-3615QE.

Feature	Atom C3808	Core i7-3615QE
Cores / Threads	12 / 12+200%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	2 GHz	3.3 GHz+65%
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.3 GHz+15%
L3 Cache	12 MB+100%	6144 kB (total)
L2 Cache	12 MB+4700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	5,671	5,617

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3808 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3615QE uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Atom C3808	Core i7-3615QE
Socket	FCBGA1310	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	12	—