i9-13900F vs Atom N435

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom N435
2011
1 core / 2 threads, 512 Watt
0.09
Core i9-13900F
2023, $524
24 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
27.75
+30733%

Core i9-13900F outperforms Atom N435 by a whopping 30733% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3668210
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data55.50
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAtomno data
Power efficiencyno data45.77
DesignerIntelIntel
Manufacturerno dataIntel
Architecture codenamePinetrail (2009−2011)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date2 June 2011 (14 years ago)4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$524

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F 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 cores1 (Single-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Performance-coresno data8
Efficient-coresno data16
Threads232
Base clock speedno data2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.33 GHz5.5 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data80K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB2 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F 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 configurationno data1
SocketFCBGA559FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)512 KB65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR2, DDR3DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data192 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data89.6 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data24

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.

Atom N435 0.09
i9-13900F 27.75
+30733%

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.

Atom N435 153
Samples: 4
i9-13900F 48934
+31883%
Samples: 404

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.09 27.75
Recency 2 June 2011 4 January 2023
Physical cores 1 24
Threads 2 32
Power consumption (TDP) 512 Watt 65 Watt

i9-13900F has a 30733.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 2300% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and 687.7% lower power consumption.

The Intel Core i9-13900F is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom N435 in performance tests.

Be aware that Atom N435 is a notebook processor while Core i9-13900F is a desktop one.

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 N435
Atom N435
Intel Core i9-13900F
Core i9-13900F

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 34 votes

Rate Atom N435 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 191 votes

Rate Core i9-13900F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Atom N435 and Core i9-13900F, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.