Atom x7-E3950 vs Core i7-2677M

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 x7-E3950 vs Core i7-2677M 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 x7-E3950 vs Core i7-2677M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom x7-E3950

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 12W instead of 17W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (245 vs 562).
❌Lower PassMark (1,864 vs 1,875).

Core i7-2677M

2011

Why buy it

✅+129.4% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌41.7% higher power demand at 17W vs 12W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-2677M better than Atom x7-E3950?

Yes. Core i7-2677M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-2677M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.8% 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, Core i7-2677M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i7-2677M still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-2677M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Atom x7-E3950 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Atom x7-E3950 vs Core i7-2677M Technical Specifications

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

Atom x7-E3950

The Atom x7-E3950 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 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,864 points. Launch price was $57.

Core i7-2677M

The Core i7-2677M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,875 points. Launch price was $317.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom x7-E3950 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i7-2677M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Atom x7-E3950 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom x7-E3950 versus 2.9 GHz on the Core i7-2677M — a 36.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-2677M (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Atom x7-E3950 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-2677M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x7-E3950 scores 1,864 against the Core i7-2677M's 1,875 — a 0.6% lead for the Core i7-2677M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 245 vs 562, a 78.6% lead for the Core i7-2677M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom x7-E3950 vs 4 MB on the Core i7-2677M.

Feature	Atom x7-E3950	Core i7-2677M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.9 GHz+45%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	1.8 GHz+12%
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB (total)+300%	512 kB
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,864	1,875
Geekbench 6 Single	245	562+129%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x7-E3950 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2677M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR4-2400 on the Atom x7-E3950 versus DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-2677M — the Atom x7-E3950 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 4 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 2 (Core i7-2677M). PCIe lanes: 6 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 16 (Core i7-2677M) — the Core i7-2677M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Apollo Lake (Atom x7-E3950) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67,UM67 (Core i7-2677M).

Feature	Atom x7-E3950	Core i7-2677M
Socket	FCBGA1296	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR4-2400+80%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	4+100%	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Atom x7-E3950) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2677M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 505 (Atom x7-E3950) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2677M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2677M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: Core i7-2677M rivals A6-3420M.