A6-9220 vs Atom x7-E3950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-E3950
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.21
+47.6%

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking22512492
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series7x Intel AtomBristol Ridge
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2016)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date30 August 2014 (9 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$57no data
Current price$377 (6.6x MSRP)$411

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.9 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)160 KB
L2 cache2 MB (shared)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature110 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220 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)no data
SocketIntel BGA 1296BGA
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt10-15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSingle-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization,
AES-NI+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Security technologies

Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GBno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 505AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no 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 x7-E3950 1.21
+47.6%
A6-9220 0.82

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Atom x7-E3950 1864
+46.3%
A6-9220 1274

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 46% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Atom x7-E3950 1304
A6-9220 2432
+86.5%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 87% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Atom x7-E3950 3769
A6-9220 3941
+4.6%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 5% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Atom x7-E3950 2152
A6-9220 2253
+4.7%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 5% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Atom x7-E3950 30.26
A6-9220 27.71
+9.2%

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 9% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Atom x7-E3950 2
+16.7%
A6-9220 1

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 17% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Atom x7-E3950 125
+12.1%
A6-9220 112

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 12% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Atom x7-E3950 41
A6-9220 69
+67.1%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 67% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Atom x7-E3950 0.51
A6-9220 0.8
+56.9%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 57% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 1
+2%
A6-9220 1

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 2% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 725
A6-9220 770
+6.2%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 6% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 9
+5.7%
A6-9220 9

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms A6-9220 by 6% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 45
A6-9220 47
+3.1%

A6-9220 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 3% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.21 0.82
Integrated graphics card 0.87 1.17
Recency 30 August 2014 1 June 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 10 Watt

The Atom x7-E3950 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-9220 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and A6-9220, 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 x7-E3950
Atom x7-E3950
AMD A6-9220
A6-9220

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.


2.5 44 votes

Rate Atom x7-E3950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 393 votes

Rate A6-9220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom x7-E3950 or A6-9220, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.