Atom x5-E3940 vs Core 2 Quad Q8200

Atom x5-E3940

4 Cores4 Thrd10 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2014

Core 2 Quad Q8200

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.33 GHz2008

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Atom x5-E3940

4 / 4

1,816

+0.5%

1,807

0.0%

Core 2 Duo E4700

Core i5-430M

Pentium Dual Core SU4100

Pentium Dual Core T2370

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom x5-E3940 is positioned at rank 337 and the Core 2 Quad Q8200 is on rank 1028, so the Atom x5-E3940 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Atom x5-E3940

#101

Core i5-1350P

MSRP: $320|Avg: $250

97%

#325

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

485%

#326

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

478%

#327

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

438%

#328

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

436%

#329

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

432%

#331

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

418%

#332

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

400%

#333

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

400%

#334

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

389%

#337

Atom x5-E3940

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Quad Q8200

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

38626%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

36498%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

26501%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

7984%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

6324%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

5532%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

3169%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

3127%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

2847%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

2847%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

2815%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

2739%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

2701%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

2690%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

2666%

#396

Ryzen Embedded R2314

MSRP: $300|Avg: $762

95%

#1028

Core 2 Quad Q8200

MSRP: $224|Avg: $36

100%

#1029

A12-9800E

MSRP: $426|Avg: $150

99%

#1030

Phenom II X6 1065T

MSRP: $426|Avg: $170

99%

#1031

Celeron 440

MSRP: $59|Avg: $10

99%

#1032

A8-3820

MSRP: $280|Avg: $200

96%

#1033

Core i7-860S

MSRP: $299|Avg: $96

96%

#1035

PRO A10-8770E

MSRP: $395|Avg: $210

94%

#1036

Core 2 Duo E4700

MSRP: $133|Avg: $10

94%

#1037

Athlon 64 X2 5800+

MSRP: $230|Avg: $20

94%

#1038

Phenom II X2 B53

MSRP: $150|Avg: $15

94%

#1039

Core 2 Quad Q9300

MSRP: $266|Avg: $27

94%

#1040

Core 2 Duo E7200

MSRP: $133|Avg: $133

93%

#1041

Athlon II X4 638

MSRP: $300|Avg: $280

93%

#1043

Phenom X3 8750

MSRP: $195|Avg: $20

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Atom x5-E3940 (2014) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3-1866, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Atom x5-E3940	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($36)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Apollo Lake (2014−2016) / 14 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Yorkfield (2007−2009) / 45 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core 2 Quad Q8200 (2008) relies on 45 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Atom x5-E3940	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($36)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Atom x5-E3940 Benchmark Check

Core 2 Quad Q8200 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Atom x5-E3940 and Core 2 Quad Q8200

Atom x5-E3940

The Atom x5-E3940 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,816 points. Launch price was $69.

Core 2 Quad Q8200

The Core 2 Quad Q8200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Yorkfield (2007−2009) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.33 GHz, with boost up to 2.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,807 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom x5-E3940 and Core 2 Quad Q8200 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Atom x5-E3940 versus 2.33 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q8200 — a 25.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q8200 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.33 GHz). The Atom x5-E3940 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 uses Yorkfield (2007−2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x5-E3940 scores 1,816 against the Core 2 Quad Q8200's 1,807 — a 0.5% lead for the Atom x5-E3940. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom x5-E3940	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	2.33 GHz+29%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.33 GHz+46%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB (total)	4 MB (total)+100%
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Yorkfield (2007−2009)
PassMark	1,816	1,807

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x5-E3940 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1866 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Atom x5-E3940) vs 16 (Core 2 Quad Q8200) — the Core 2 Quad Q8200 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Atom x5-E3940	Core 2 Quad Q8200
Socket	FCBGA1296	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1866	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	✅	❌
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-E3940) / VT-x (Core 2 Quad Q8200). The Atom x5-E3940 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 500), while the Core 2 Quad Q8200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Quad Q8200 targets Desktop.