3015e vs Atom C3558

VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom C3558
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 16 Watt
1.56
3015e
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.74
+11.5%

3015e outperforms Atom C3558 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom C3558 and 3015e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21232039
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.47no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesIntel AtomAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency9.0626.93
Architecture codenameGoldmont (2016−2017)Pollock (Zen) (2020)
Release date15 August 2017 (7 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Atom C3558 and 3015e 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.2 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.3 GHz
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache224 KB192 KB
L2 cache8 MB1 MB
L3 cache8 MB4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature83 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Atom C3558 and 3015e 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCBGA1310FT5
Power consumption (TDP)16 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3558 and 3015e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
QuickAssist+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data

Security technologies

Atom C3558 and 3015e 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 Atom C3558 and 3015e 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 Atom C3558 and 3015e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4: 2133DDR4
Maximum memory size256 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth29.871 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3558 and 3015e.

PCIe version3no data
PCI Express lanes12no data
USB revision3no data
Total number of SATA ports12no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports12no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBEno data

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.

Atom C3558 1.56
3015e 1.74
+11.5%

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.

Atom C3558 2431
3015e 2712
+11.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 1.74
Recency 15 August 2017 4 August 2020
Physical cores 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 16 Watt 6 Watt

Atom C3558 has 100% more physical cores.

3015e, on the other hand, has a 11.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

The 3015e is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3558 in performance tests.

Be aware that Atom C3558 is a server/workstation processor while 3015e is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom C3558 and 3015e, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Atom C3558
Atom C3558
AMD 3015e
3015e

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4 1 vote

Rate Atom C3558 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 29 votes

Rate 3015e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom C3558 or 3015e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.