Atom x5-Z8550 vs E2-3800

Atom x5-Z8550 vs E2-3800 Performance Spectrum

Atom x5-Z8550

4 / 4

1,143

+0.6%

1,136

0.0%

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

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 x5-Z8550 vs E2-3800 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-Z8550 vs E2-3800: 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-Z8550

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

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

E2-3800

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom x5-Z8550 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,136 vs 1,143).
❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Atom x5-Z8550 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-Z8550 better than E2-3800?

Yes. Atom x5-Z8550 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% 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 x5-Z8550 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.3% 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 x5-Z8550 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x5-Z8550 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Atom x5-Z8550 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. E2-3800 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 3.3% in the shared gaming data.

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

Atom x5-Z8550 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-Z8550 vs E2-3800 Technical Specifications

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

Atom x5-Z8550

The Atom x5-Z8550 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. Base frequency is 1.44 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: UTFCBGA1380. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,143 points. Launch price was $69.

E2-3800

The E2-3800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,136 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom x5-Z8550 and E2-3800 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Atom x5-Z8550 versus 1.3 GHz on the E2-3800 — a 59.5% clock advantage for the Atom x5-Z8550. The Atom x5-Z8550 uses the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the E2-3800 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x5-Z8550 scores 1,143 against the E2-3800's 1,136 — a 0.6% lead for the Atom x5-Z8550.

Feature	Atom x5-Z8550	E2-3800
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+85%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	1.44 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	2 MB	2048 kB
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Cherry Trail (2015−2016)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,143	1,136
Geekbench 6 Single	—	136
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	389

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x5-Z8550 uses the UTFCBGA1380 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E2-3800 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR3-1600 memory speed. The E2-3800 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Atom x5-Z8550) vs 1 (E2-3800). PCIe lanes: 2 (Atom x5-Z8550) vs 4 (E2-3800) — the E2-3800 offers 2 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom x5-Z8550) and SoC (E2-3800).

Feature	Atom x5-Z8550	E2-3800
Socket	UTFCBGA1380	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR3-1600	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	2	4+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-Z8550) / Yes (E2-3800). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (Atom x5-Z8550) and Radeon HD 8280 (E2-3800) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU.