i3-8300 vs Atom N2800
Primary details
Comparing Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1422 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 4.73 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | Intel Core i3 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 6.06 |
| Architecture codename | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 1 December 2011 (12 years ago) | 14 February 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $47 | $138 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 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 | 3.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 37 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 66 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 176 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCBGA559 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6.5 Watt | 62 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
Security technologies
Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2400 |
| Maximum memory size | 4.88 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.15 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@24Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 December 2011 | 14 February 2018 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 62 Watt |
Atom N2800 has 933.3% lower power consumption.
i3-8300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom N2800 is a notebook processor while Core i3-8300 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom N2800 and Core i3-8300, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
