Atom x5-Z8500 vs FX-9800P
Aggregate performance score
FX-9800P outperforms Atom x5-Z8500 by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2103 | 2640 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | 5x Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 10.16 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Cherry Trail (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 2 March 2015 (9 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 1.44 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.24 GHz |
| L1 cache | 320 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per module) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FP4 | UTFCBGA1380 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 758 MHz) | Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (200 - 600 MHz) |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 600 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 3840x2160 |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 2560x1600 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 2 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 3 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.61 | 0.78 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.96 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 2 March 2015 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
FX-9800P has a 106.4% higher aggregate performance score, 154.5% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 1 year.
Atom x5-Z8500, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The FX-9800P is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x5-Z8500 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9800P and Atom x5-Z8500, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
