Ultra 9 285K vs Atom x7-E3950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-E3950
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.17
Core Ultra 9 285K
2024
24 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
43.07
+3581%

Core Ultra 9 285K outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by a whopping 3581% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking237253
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data74.33
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Series7x Intel Atomno data
Power efficiency9.2332.61
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date30 August 2014 (10 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$57$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads424
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz5.7 GHz
Bus rateno data250 MHz
L1 cache56K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB (shared)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum core temperature110 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K 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)1
SocketIntel BGA 12961851
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
TSX-+

Security technologies

Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR5 Depends on motherboard
Maximum memory size8 GBno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 505 (500 - 650 MHz)Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes420

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 1.17
Ultra 9 285K 43.07
+3581%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 1864
Ultra 9 285K 68422
+3571%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.17 43.07
Recency 30 August 2014 24 October 2024
Physical cores 4 24
Threads 4 24
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 125 Watt

Atom x7-E3950 has 941.7% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has a 3581.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x7-E3950 in performance tests.

Be aware that Atom x7-E3950 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and Core Ultra 9 285K, 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
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
Core Ultra 9 285K

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.


2.6 48 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 167 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 285K 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 Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.