Ryzen 9 9950X vs Atom N2800
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 9950X outperforms Atom N2800 by a whopping 14836% 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 | 3412 | 101 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 68.85 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.83 | 23.53 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) | Granite Ridge (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 1 December 2011 (13 years ago) | 15 August 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $47 | $649 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Atom N2800 and Ryzen 9 9950X 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) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 1.86 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.87 GHz | 5.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 66 mm2 | 2x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 176 million | 16,630 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom N2800 and Ryzen 9 9950X 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 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6.5 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N2800 and Ryzen 9 9950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Atom N2800 and Ryzen 9 9950X 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 Ryzen 9 9950X 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 Ryzen 9 9950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
| 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) | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom N2800 and Ryzen 9 9950X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 24 |
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
TrueCrypt AES
TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.
x264 encoding pass 2
x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.
x264 encoding pass 1
x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.25 | 37.34 |
| Recency | 1 December 2011 | 15 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 16 |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 170 Watt |
Atom N2800 has 2733.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 9 9950X, on the other hand, has a 14836% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom N2800 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom N2800 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 9 9950X 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.
