Atom E3825 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 E3825 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 E3825 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 E3825

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 7W, a 1W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom E3826 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 545).

Atom E3826

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌16.7% higher power demand at 7W vs 6W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom E3826 better than Atom E3825?

Yes. Atom E3826 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.6% 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 7.6% 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 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 7.6% 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 more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom E3825 vs Atom E3826 Technical Specifications

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

Atom E3825

The Atom E3825 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: 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $73.

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

Both the Atom E3825 and Atom E3826 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.33 GHz on the Atom E3825 versus 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3826 — a 10% clock advantage for the Atom E3826. Both are built on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture using a 22 nm process. In PassMark, the Atom E3825 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 E3825	Atom E3826
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.33 GHz	1.47 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	Bay Trail-I (2013)
PassMark	525	545+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the FCBGA1170 socket with PCIe 2.0. Both support up to DDR3L-1066 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (Atom E3825) vs 2 (Atom E3826). Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3825) and Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3826).

Feature	Atom E3825	Atom E3826
Socket	FCBGA1170	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1066	DDR3L-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom E3825) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom E3826) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU.