Atom N475 vs Core Solo T1300

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 N475 vs Core Solo T1300 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 N475 vs Core Solo T1300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom N475

2010

Why buy it

✅Costs $134 less on MSRP ($75 MSRP vs $209 MSRP).
✅Delivers 193.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 5.4 vs 1.8 PassMark/$ ($75 MSRP vs $209 MSRP).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel GMA 3150, while Core Solo T1300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Core Solo T1300

2006

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (385 vs 405).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.8 vs 5.4 PassMark/$ ($209 MSRP vs $75 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom N475 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom N475 better than Core Solo T1300?

Yes. Atom N475 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 5.2% 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 N475 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 10.2% higher max boost clock.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom N475 is the stronger fit. You are getting 5.2% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Atom N475 is the better buy right now. Atom N475 comes in $134 cheaper on MSRP at $75 MSRP versus $209 MSRP, and it still gives you 5.2% higher PassMark. It is also 193.1% better value on MSRP (5.4 vs 1.8 PassMark/$), 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 N475 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2006) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom N475 vs Core Solo T1300 Technical Specifications

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

Atom N475

The Atom N475 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Pineview (2009−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 1.83 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA559. Thermal design power (TDP): 6.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 405 points. Launch price was $75.

Core Solo T1300

The Core Solo T1300 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. Base frequency is 1.66 GHz, with boost up to 1.66 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 27 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 385 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom N475 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core Solo T1300's 1 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.83 GHz on the Atom N475 versus 1.66 GHz on the Core Solo T1300 — a 9.7% clock advantage for the Atom N475 (base: 1.83 GHz vs 1.66 GHz). The Atom N475 uses the Pineview (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core Solo T1300 uses Yonah (2005−2006) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Atom N475 scores 405 against the Core Solo T1300's 385 — a 5.1% lead for the Atom N475. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom N475	Core Solo T1300
Cores / Threads	1 / 2	1 / 1
Boost Clock	1.83 GHz+10%	1.66 GHz
Base Clock	1.83 GHz+10%	1.66 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+25500%	2 MB
Process	45 nm-31%	65 nm
Architecture	Pineview (2009−2011)	Yonah (2005−2006)
PassMark	405+5%	385

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom N475 uses the FCBGA559 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core Solo T1300 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Atom N475	Core Solo T1300
Socket	FCBGA559	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-667	—
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

The Atom N475 includes integrated graphics (Intel GMA 3150), while the Core Solo T1300 requires a dedicated GPU.

Feature	Atom N475	Core Solo T1300
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Intel GMA 3150	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Atom N475 was priced at $75, while the Core Solo T1300 came in at $209. On launch pricing ($75 vs $209), Atom N475 was $134 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Atom N475 delivers 5.4 pts/$ vs 1.8 pts/$ for the Core Solo T1300 — making the Atom N475 the 98.3% better value option.

Feature	Atom N475	Core Solo T1300
MSRP	$75-64%	$209
Performance per Dollar	5.4+200%	1.8
Release Date	2010	2006

Search Atom N475 on Amazon

Search Core Solo T1300 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.