Atom C3558 vs Xeon D-1528
Aggregate performance score
Xeon D-1528 outperforms Atom C3558 by a whopping 180% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1311 | 2055 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.51 | 0.47 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | Intel Xeon D | Intel Atom |
| Architecture codename | Broadwell (2015−2019) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 1 November 2015 (8 years ago) | 15 August 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $320 | $86 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon D-1528 has 9% better value for money than Atom C3558.
Detailed specifications
Xeon D-1528 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 224 KB |
| L2 cache | 1.5 MB | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 9 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246.24 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 83 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 80 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3200 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon D-1528 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1667 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 16 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| TSX | + | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 Dual-channel | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.124 GB/s | 29.871 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 12 |
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.
Xeon D-1528 outperforms Atom C3558 by 180% 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: 65%
Xeon D-1528 outperforms Atom C3558 by 180% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.39 | 1.57 |
| Recency | 1 November 2015 | 15 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 4 |
| Threads | 12 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 16 Watt |
Xeon D-1528 has a 179.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 200% more threads.
Atom C3558, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 118.8% lower power consumption.
The Xeon D-1528 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3558 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon D-1528 and Atom C3558, 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.
