i3-3217U vs Atom x7835RE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7835RE
2024, $127
8 cores / 8 threads, 12 Watt
3.93
+470%
Core i3-3217U
2012, $225
2 cores / 4 threads, 17 Watt
0.69

Atom x7835RE outperforms Core i3-3217U by a whopping 470% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking15942933
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation21.090.03
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core i3
Power efficiency35.19no data
DesignerIntelIntel
ManufacturerIntelIntel
Architecture codenameAmston Lake (2024−2025)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date8 April 2024 (1 year ago)1 June 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$127$225

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Atom x7835RE has 70200% better value for money than i3-3217U.

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads84
Base clock speed1.3 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache96 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB (per module)256K (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U 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 configuration11
SocketIntel BGA 1264FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AVX
AES-NI+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4, DDR5DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 32EUIntel HD Graphics 4000
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes916

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 x7835RE 3.93
+470%
i3-3217U 0.69

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 x7835RE 6951
+467%
Samples: 23
i3-3217U 1226
Samples: 2701

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.93 0.69
Recency 8 April 2024 1 June 2012
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 10 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 17 Watt

Atom x7835RE has a 469.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 300% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 120% more advanced lithography process, and 41.7% lower power consumption.

The Intel Atom x7835RE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core i3-3217U in performance tests.

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 x7835RE
Atom x7835RE
Intel Core i3-3217U
Core i3-3217U

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Atom x7835RE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 640 votes

Rate Core i3-3217U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Atom x7835RE and Core i3-3217U, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.