Xeon Gold 6530 vs Atom C3558

Aggregate performance score

Atom C3558
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 16 Watt
1.59
Xeon Gold 6530
2023
32 cores / 64 threads, 270 Watt
42.82
+2593%

Xeon Gold 6530 outperforms Atom C3558 by a whopping 2593% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking212060
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.4755.96
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Atomno data
Power efficiency9.0614.46
Architecture codenameGoldmont (2016−2017)Emerald Rapids (2023)
Release date15 August 2017 (7 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86$2,128

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6530 has 11806% better value for money than Atom C3558.

Detailed specifications

Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz4 GHz
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache224 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache8 MB160 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data2x 763 mm2
Maximum core temperature83 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530 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
SocketFCBGA1310FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)16 Watt270 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
QuickAssist+no data
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
SGX-Yes with Intel® SPS
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4: 2133DDR5 @ 4800 MT/s (1 DPC)
Maximum memory size256 GB4 TB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth29.871 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530.

PCIe version35.0
PCI Express lanes1280
USB revision3no data
Total number of SATA ports12no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports12no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBEno data

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 C3558 1.59
Xeon Gold 6530 42.82
+2593%

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 C3558 2431
Xeon Gold 6530 65533
+2596%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.59 42.82
Recency 15 August 2017 14 December 2023
Physical cores 4 32
Threads 4 64
Power consumption (TDP) 16 Watt 270 Watt

Atom C3558 has 1587.5% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6530, on the other hand, has a 2593.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 6530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3558 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom C3558 and Xeon Gold 6530, 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 C3558
Atom C3558
Intel Xeon Gold 6530
Xeon Gold 6530

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.


4 1 vote

Rate Atom C3558 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom C3558 or Xeon Gold 6530, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.