Atom C3338 vs Phenom X4 9650
Aggregate performance score
Phenom X4 9650 outperforms Atom C3338 by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2302 | 2640 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.72 | 0.07 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Architecture codename | Agena (2007−2008) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | March 2008 (16 years ago) | 22 February 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $27 |
| Current price | $23 | $698 (25.9x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Phenom X4 9650 has 6643% better value for money than Atom C3338.
Detailed specifications
Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 112 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 89 °C |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 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 | AM2+ | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 8.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
Security technologies
Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4: 1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 14.936 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338.
| PCIe version | no data | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 10 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 10 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 10 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x2.5/1 GBE |
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.
Phenom X4 9650 outperforms Atom C3338 by 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Phenom X4 9650 outperforms Atom C3338 by 67% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.11 | 0.66 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 8 Watt |
The Phenom X4 9650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3338 in performance tests.
Note that Phenom X4 9650 is a desktop processor while Atom C3338 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338, 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.
