i9-12900F vs Atom C3538
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-12900F outperforms Atom C3538 by a whopping 1789% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2598 | 326 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.04 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.05 | 13.30 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Goldmont (2016−2017) | Alder Lake-S (2022) |
| Release date | 15 August 2017 (8 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 8 |
| Efficient-cores | no data | 8 |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 21 | no data |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 80K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | no data | 215 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 87 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1310 | FCLGA1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
| OS Guard | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4: 2133 | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 29.871 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3538 and Core i9-12900F.
| PCIe version | 3 | 5.0 and 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 20 |
| USB revision | 3 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 12 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no data |
| Integrated LAN | 2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBE | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.08 | 20.40 |
| Recency | 15 August 2017 | 4 January 2022 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 16 |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Atom C3538 has 333.3% lower power consumption.
i9-12900F, on the other hand, has a 1788.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and 300% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
The Intel Core i9-12900F is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom C3538 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom C3538 is a server/workstation processor while Core i9-12900F is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
