Atom Z2760 vs Core i3-3120M

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 Z2760 vs Core i3-3120M 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 Z2760 vs Core i3-3120M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom Z2760

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 512W, a 509W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,697 vs 1,709).

Core i3-3120M

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌16966.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 3W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3120M better than Atom Z2760?

Yes. Core i3-3120M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% 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, Core i3-3120M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% 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 i3-3120M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-3120M still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-3120M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-3120M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom Z2760 vs Core i3-3120M Technical Specifications

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

Atom Z2760

The Atom Z2760 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Cloverview (2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FC-MB4760. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,697 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i3-3120M

The Core i3-3120M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,709 points. Launch price was $160.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom Z2760 and Core i3-3120M share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Atom Z2760 versus 2.5 GHz on the Core i3-3120M — a 32.6% clock advantage for the Core i3-3120M (base: 1.8 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Atom Z2760 uses the Cloverview (2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-3120M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom Z2760 scores 1,697 against the Core i3-3120M's 1,709 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i3-3120M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom Z2760 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3120M.

Feature	Atom Z2760	Core i3-3120M
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	2.5 GHz+39%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2.5 GHz+39%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Cloverview (2012)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,697	1,709
Geekbench 6 Single	—	440
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	930

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom Z2760 uses the FC-MB4760 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-3120M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR2-800 on the Atom Z2760 versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-3120M — the Core i3-3120M supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-3120M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom Z2760) vs 16 (Core i3-3120M) — the Core i3-3120M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel BGA1264 (Atom Z2760) and HM76,HM77 (Core i3-3120M).

Feature	Atom Z2760	Core i3-3120M
Socket	FC-MB4760	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR2-800	DDR3-1600+100%
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	32 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom Z2760) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-3120M). Both include integrated graphics — Intel GMA 3650 (Atom Z2760) and Intel HD Graphics 4000 (Core i3-3120M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-3120M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i3-3120M rivals AMD A8-4500M.