Xeon Gold 6538N vs Atom 330

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom 330
2008
2 cores / 4 threads, 8 Watt
0.23
Xeon Gold 6538N
2023
32 cores / 64 threads, 205 Watt
28.26
+12187%

Xeon Gold 6538N outperforms Atom 330 by a whopping 12187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3190165
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data21.85
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Atomno data
Power efficiency2.7213.05
Architecture codenameDiamondville (2008−2009)Emerald Rapids (2023)
Release date2 April 2008 (16 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$43$3,351

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed0.1 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus typeFSBno data
Bus rate533.33 MT/sno data
Multiplier12no data
L1 cache112 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB60 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size51.9276 mm22x 763 mm2
Maximum core temperature85 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data85 °C
Number of transistors94 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range0.9V-1.1625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketPBGA437FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)8 Watt205 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x-+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-5200
Maximum memory size8 GB4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data80

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Atom 330 0.23
Xeon Gold 6538N 28.26
+12187%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Atom 330 363
Xeon Gold 6538N 44895
+12268%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.23 28.26
Recency 2 April 2008 14 December 2023
Physical cores 2 32
Threads 4 64
Power consumption (TDP) 8 Watt 205 Watt

Atom 330 has 2462.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6538N, on the other hand, has a 12187% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and 1500% more physical cores and 1500% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 6538N is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom 330 in performance tests.

Be aware that Atom 330 is a notebook processor while Xeon Gold 6538N is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom 330 and Xeon Gold 6538N, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Atom 330
Atom 330
Intel Xeon Gold 6538N
Xeon Gold 6538N

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 65 votes

Rate Atom 330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon Gold 6538N on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom 330 or Xeon Gold 6538N, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.