Atom E3815 vs Core Solo T1200

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 E3815 vs Core Solo T1200 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 E3815 vs Core Solo T1200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom E3815

2013

Why buy it

✅+2.8% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Core Solo T1200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌25500% higher power demand at 512W vs 2W.

Core Solo T1200

2006

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 512W, a 510W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (355 vs 365).
❌Launch MSRP is still $209 MSRP, while Atom E3815 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom E3815 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Solo T1200 better than Atom E3815?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core Solo T1200 is ahead with 2% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom E3815 pulls ahead with 2.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom E3815 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.8% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Core Solo T1200 is the better buy right now. Core Solo T1200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $209 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 2% higher max boost clock. The compromise is that Atom E3815 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 2.8% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (1.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Atom E3815 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2006) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom E3815 vs Core Solo T1200 Technical Specifications

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

Atom E3815

The Atom E3815 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 1 cores and 1 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): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 365 points. Launch price was $134.

Core Solo T1200

The Core Solo T1200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yonah (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: BGA479. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 355 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom E3815 and Core Solo T1200 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3815 versus 1.5 GHz on the Core Solo T1200 — a 2% clock advantage for the Core Solo T1200. The Atom E3815 uses the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core Solo T1200 uses Yonah (2005−2006) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E3815 scores 365 against the Core Solo T1200's 355 — a 2.8% lead for the Atom E3815. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom E3815	Core Solo T1200
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.47 GHz	1.5 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	2 MB+300%
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	Yonah (2005−2006)
PassMark	365+3%	355

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom E3815 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core Solo T1200 uses BGA479 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Atom E3815	Core Solo T1200
Socket	FCBGA1170	BGA479
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—