Atom D510 vs Atom E3826

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 D510 vs Atom E3826 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 D510 vs Atom E3826: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom D510

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom E3826 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 545).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 13W vs 7W.

Atom E3826

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 7W instead of 13W, a 6W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Atom E3826 better than Atom D510?

Yes. Atom E3826 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 3.8% 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 E3826 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.8% 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 E3826 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom E3826 still makes the most sense overall. Atom E3826 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Atom E3826 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom D510 vs Atom E3826 Technical Specifications

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

Atom D510

The Atom D510 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 December 2009 (15 years ago). It is based on the Pineview (2009−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.66 GHz, with boost up to 1.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA559. Thermal design power (TDP): 13 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $97.

Atom E3826

The Atom E3826 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.47 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom D510 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Atom E3826's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.67 GHz on the Atom D510 versus 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3826 — a 12.7% clock advantage for the Atom D510. The Atom D510 uses the Pineview (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Atom E3826 uses Bay Trail-I (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom D510 scores 525 against the Atom E3826's 545 — a 3.7% lead for the Atom E3826. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom D510	Atom E3826
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.67 GHz+14%	1.47 GHz
Base Clock	1.66 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)
Process	45 nm	22 nm-51%
Architecture	Pineview (2009−2011)	Bay Trail-I (2013)
PassMark	525	545+4%
Geekbench 6 Single	130	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	350	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom D510 uses the FCBGA559 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Atom E3826 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Atom D510 versus DDR3L-1066 on the Atom E3826 — the Atom E3826 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom E3826 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom D510) vs 2 (Atom E3826). Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: NM10 (Atom D510) and Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3826).

Feature	Atom D510	Atom E3826
Socket	FCBGA559	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3L-1066+33%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: None (Atom D510) / not specified (Atom E3826). Both include integrated graphics — Intel GMA 3150 (Atom D510) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom E3826) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Atom D510 targets Nettop.