Athlon X4 970 vs Atom N2800
Aggregate performance score
Athlon X4 970 outperforms Atom N2800 by a whopping 500% 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 | 3415 | 2346 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.83 | 2.47 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | no data |
| Architecture codename | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 1 December 2011 (13 years ago) | 27 July 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $47 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.86 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 66 mm2 | 246 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 74 °C |
| Number of transistors | 176 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA559 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6.5 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
Security technologies
Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom N2800 and Athlon X4 970. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 4.88 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 1 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz) | 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 | 0.25 | 1.50 |
| Recency | 1 December 2011 | 27 July 2017 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
Atom N2800 has 983.3% lower power consumption.
Athlon X4 970, on the other hand, has a 500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Athlon X4 970 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom N2800 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom N2800 is a notebook processor while Athlon X4 970 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.
