Xeon W3503 vs Atom C3538
Aggregate performance score
Atom C3538 outperforms Xeon W3503 by an impressive 73% 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 | 2665 | 3054 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.04 | 4.15 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | Intel Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.07 | 0.20 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Goldmont (2016−2017) | Bloomfield (2008−2010) |
| Release date | 15 August 2017 (8 years ago) | 30 March 2009 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | $65 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon W3503 has 10275% better value for money than Atom C3538.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Multiplier | 21 | no data |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 263 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 87 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 731 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.8V-1.225V |
Compatibility
Information on Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503 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 | 1366 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | + |
| PAE | no data | 36 Bit |
Security technologies
Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4: 2133 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | 24 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 29.871 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3538 and Xeon W3503.
| PCIe version | 3 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | no data |
| 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.09 | 0.63 |
| Recency | 15 August 2017 | 30 March 2009 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 130 Watt |
Atom C3538 has a 73% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 221% more advanced lithography process, and 767% lower power consumption.
The Intel Atom C3538 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon W3503 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
