Atom C3558 vs Phenom II X4 840
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X4 840 outperforms Atom C3558 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2410 | 2420 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.08 | 0.47 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 1.57 | 9.27 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Propus (2009−2011) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 15 August 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $90 | $86 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Phenom II X4 840 has 555% better value for money than Atom C3558.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558 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 | 3.2 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 224 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 8 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 169 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 83 °C |
| Number of transistors | 300 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558 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 | AM3 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 16 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4: 2133 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 29.871 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 840 and Atom C3558.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 12 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBE |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.39 | 1.38 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 15 August 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 16 Watt |
Phenom II X4 840 has a 0.7% higher aggregate performance score.
Atom C3558, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 493.8% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between AMD Phenom II X4 840 and Intel Atom C3558.
Note that Phenom II X4 840 is a desktop processor while Atom C3558 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
