Atom C3858 vs Xeon X5672

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 C3858 vs Xeon X5672 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 C3858 vs Xeon X5672: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom C3858

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.7% higher average FPS across 23 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 25W instead of 95W, a 70W 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.

Xeon X5672

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom C3858 across 23 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,036 vs 5,040).
❌Launch MSRP is still $300 MSRP, while Atom C3858 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌280% higher power demand at 95W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom C3858 better than Xeon X5672?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5672 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Atom C3858 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Atom C3858 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 12.7% more average FPS across 23 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom C3858 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 12 threads.

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

Atom C3858 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon X5672 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Atom C3858 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $300 MSRP, and it still gives you a 12.7% average FPS lead across 23 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon X5672 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 C3858 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2011) 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 C3858 vs Xeon X5672 Technical Specifications

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

Atom C3858

The Atom C3858 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: 2400. Passmark benchmark score: 5,040 points. Launch price was $332.

Xeon X5672

The Xeon X5672 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,036 points. Launch price was $115.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3858 packs 12 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon X5672 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Atom C3858 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom C3858 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon X5672 — a 57.1% clock advantage for the Xeon X5672 (base: 2 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Atom C3858 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5672 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3858 scores 5,040 against the Xeon X5672's 5,036 — a 0.1% lead for the Atom C3858. L3 cache: 12 MB on the Atom C3858 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5672.

Feature	Atom C3858	Xeon X5672
Cores / Threads	12 / 12+200%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	2 GHz	3.6 GHz+80%
Base Clock	2 GHz	3.2 GHz+60%
L3 Cache	12 MB	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	12 MB+4700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	5,040	5,036

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3858 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5672 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Atom C3858 versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5672 — the Atom C3858 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Atom C3858) vs 3 (Xeon X5672). Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1310 (Atom C3858) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5672).

Feature	Atom C3858	Xeon X5672
Socket	FCBGA1310	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+80%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom C3858) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5672). Primary use case: Xeon X5672 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5672 rivals Core i7-980X.