Atom x5-E8000 vs FX-4350

Atom x5-E8000 vs FX-4350 Performance Spectrum

Atom x5-E8000

4 / 4

3,219

+1.1%

3,184

0.0%

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 x5-E8000 vs FX-4350 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 x5-E8000 vs FX-4350: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom x5-E8000

2016

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $104 less on MSRP ($18 MSRP vs $122 MSRP).
✅Delivers 585.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 178.8 vs 26.1 PassMark/$ ($18 MSRP vs $122 MSRP).
✅Draws 5W instead of 125W, a 120W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Braswell), while FX-4350 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4350 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-4350.

FX-4350

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Atom x5-E8000.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,184 vs 3,219).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 26.1 vs 178.8 PassMark/$ ($122 MSRP vs $18 MSRP).
❌2400% higher power demand at 125W vs 5W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom x5-E8000 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-E8000 better than FX-4350?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-4350 is ahead with a 6.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E8000 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-E8000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x5-E8000 is the better buy right now. Atom x5-E8000 comes in $104 cheaper on MSRP at $18 MSRP versus $122 MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The compromise is that FX-4350 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 6.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 585.2% better value on MSRP (178.8 vs 26.1 PassMark/$), 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 x5-E8000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom x5-E8000 vs FX-4350 Technical Specifications

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

Atom x5-E8000

The Atom x5-E8000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 February 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.04 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,219 points. Launch price was $39.

FX-4350

The FX-4350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,184 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom x5-E8000 and FX-4350 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.04 GHz on the Atom x5-E8000 versus 4.3 GHz on the FX-4350 — a 122.1% clock advantage for the FX-4350. The Atom x5-E8000 uses the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-4350 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x5-E8000 scores 3,219 against the FX-4350's 3,184 — a 1.1% lead for the Atom x5-E8000.

Feature	Atom x5-E8000	FX-4350
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	1.04 GHz	4.3 GHz+313%
Base Clock	—	4.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	2 MB	4096 kB+100%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Cherry Trail (2015−2016)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	3,219+1%	3,184
Geekbench 6 Single	—	504
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,289

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Atom x5-E8000 versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-4350 — the FX-4350 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The FX-4350 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Atom x5-E8000) vs 16 (FX-4350) — the FX-4350 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom x5-E8000) and AMD 970,990X,990FX (FX-4350).

Feature	Atom x5-E8000	FX-4350
Socket	—	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	DDR3-1866+17%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	4	16+300%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-E8000) / AMD-V (FX-4350). The Atom x5-E8000 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)), while the FX-4350 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: FX-4350 targets Gaming.

Feature	Atom x5-E8000	FX-4350
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)	—
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	AMD-V
Target Use	—	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Atom x5-E8000 was priced at $18, while the FX-4350 came in at $122. On launch pricing ($18 vs $122), Atom x5-E8000 was $104 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Atom x5-E8000 delivers 178.8 pts/$ vs 26.1 pts/$ for the FX-4350 — making the Atom x5-E8000 the 149.1% better value option.

Feature	Atom x5-E8000	FX-4350
MSRP	$18-85%	$122
Performance per Dollar	178.8+585%	26.1
Release Date	2016	2013

Search Atom x5-E8000 on Amazon

Search FX-4350 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.