Atom E3827 vs E1-1500

Atom E3827 vs E1-1500 Performance Spectrum

Atom E3827

2 / 2

665

+0.8%

660

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

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 E3827 vs E1-1500 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 E3827 vs E1-1500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom E3827

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 8W instead of 18W, a 10W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while E1-1500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

E1-1500

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom E3827 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (660 vs 665).
❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Atom E3827 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌125% higher power demand at 18W vs 8W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom E3827 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom E3827 better than E1-1500?

Yes. Atom E3827 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% 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 E3827 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.2% 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 E3827 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom E3827 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Atom E3827 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. E1-1500 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 6.2% in the shared gaming data.

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

Atom E3827 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 E3827 vs E1-1500 Technical Specifications

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

Atom E3827

The Atom E3827 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: 1.75 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 665 points. Launch price was $69.

E1-1500

The E1-1500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 660 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom E3827 and E1-1500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.75 GHz on the Atom E3827 versus 1.48 GHz on the E1-1500 — a 16.7% clock advantage for the Atom E3827. The Atom E3827 uses the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the E1-1500 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E3827 scores 665 against the E1-1500's 660 — a 0.8% lead for the Atom E3827. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom E3827	E1-1500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.75 GHz+18%	1.48 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	22 nm-45%	40 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-I (2013)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	665	660

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom E3827 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E1-1500 uses FT1 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.