Atom E3815 vs C-60
Aggregate performance score
C-60 outperforms Atom E3815 by an impressive 82% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing C-60 and Atom E3815 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3240 | 3371 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD C-Series | Atom |
| Power efficiency | 2.12 | 2.10 |
| Architecture codename | Ontario (2011−2012) | Bay Trail-I (2013) |
| Release date | 22 August 2011 (13 years ago) | 8 October 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $134 |
Detailed specifications
C-60 and Atom E3815 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.33 GHz | 1.47 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on C-60 and Atom E3815 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | Intel BGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-60 and Atom E3815. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by C-60 and Atom E3815 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-60 and Atom E3815. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6290 | Intel HD Graphics |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.20 | 0.11 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.27 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 22 August 2011 | 8 October 2013 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 5 Watt |
C-60 has a 81.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Atom E3815, on the other hand, has 185.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, a 81.8% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.
The C-60 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom E3815 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between C-60 and Atom E3815, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
