Ryzen 7 7700 vs Atom x7-E3950

VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-E3950
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.17
Ryzen 7 7700
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
21.79
+1762%

Ryzen 7 7700 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by a whopping 1762% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2367242
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data51.42
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Series7x Intel AtomAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency9.1831.56
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Raphael (Zen4) (2022−2023)
Release date26 October 2016 (8 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$57$339

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads416
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz5.3 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)512 KB
L2 cache2 MB (shared)8 MB
L3 cache0 KB32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data71 mm2
Maximum core temperature110 °C95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °C61 °C
Number of transistorsno data6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700 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 1296AM5
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt65W, (85W real world)

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data5 nm, 0.650 - 1.475V
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700 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 Ryzen 7 7700 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 x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR5-5200
Maximum memory size8 GB128 GB

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 505 (500 - 650 MHz)AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) (400 - 2200 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes424

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
Ryzen 7 7700 21.79
+1762%

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
Ryzen 7 7700 34617
+1757%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Atom x7-E3950 231
Ryzen 7 7700 2876
+1145%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Atom x7-E3950 718
Ryzen 7 7700 14933
+1980%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 1304
Ryzen 7 7700 8345
+540%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 3769
Ryzen 7 7700 53881
+1330%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 2152
Ryzen 7 7700 18277
+749%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 30.26
Ryzen 7 7700 2.72
+1013%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 2
Ryzen 7 7700 34
+2030%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Atom x7-E3950 125
Ryzen 7 7700 3047
+2338%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 41
Ryzen 7 7700 308
+651%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 0.51
Ryzen 7 7700 3.64
+614%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 1
Ryzen 7 7700 15.9
+1490%

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.  

Atom x7-E3950 9
Ryzen 7 7700 175
+1802%

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.  

Atom x7-E3950 45
Ryzen 7 7700 368
+716%

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.

Atom x7-E3950 725
Ryzen 7 7700 14860
+1950%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.17 21.79
Integrated graphics card 0.93 4.42
Recency 26 October 2016 4 January 2023
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 65 Watt

Atom x7-E3950 has 441.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 7700, on the other hand, has a 1762.4% higher aggregate performance score, 375.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 7700 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 Ryzen 7 7700 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and Ryzen 7 7700, 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 Ryzen 7 7700
Ryzen 7 7700

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
4.5 1490 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7700 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 Ryzen 7 7700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.