Atom N475 vs Phenom X3 8550
Aggregate performance score
Phenom X3 8550 outperforms Atom N475 by a whopping 555% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2679 | 3355 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.13 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 0.72 | 1.49 |
| Architecture codename | Toliman (2008) | Pineview (2009−2011) |
| Release date | April 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 June 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $170 | $75 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475 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 | 3 (Tri-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.83 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.83 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | 66 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 123 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475 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+ | FCBGA559 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
Security technologies
Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel GMA 3150 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.72 | 0.11 |
| Physical cores | 3 | 1 |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Phenom X3 8550 has a 554.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Atom N475, on the other hand, has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.
The Phenom X3 8550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N475 in performance tests.
Note that Phenom X3 8550 is a desktop processor while Atom N475 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X3 8550 and Atom N475, 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.
