Atom C3338 vs Phenom X4 9650

Aggregate performance score

Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.09
+67.7%
Atom C3338
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 8 Watt
0.65

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 the ranking24022748
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataIntel Atom
Power efficiency1.086.81
Architecture codenameAgena (2007−2008)Goldmont (2016−2017)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)22 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$27

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speedno data1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.2 GHz
Multiplierno data15
L1 cache128 KB (per core)112 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)4 MB
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die size285 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data89 °C
Number of transistors450 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM2+FCBGA1310
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt8.5 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-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
QuickAssistno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-

Security technologies

Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno 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 typesno dataDDR4: 1866
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data1
Maximum memory bandwidthno data14.936 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Atom C3338.

PCIe versionno data3
PCI Express lanesno data10
USB revisionno data3
Total number of SATA portsno data10
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data10
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data4x2.5/1 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 1.09
+67.7%
Atom C3338 0.65

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.

Phenom X4 9650 1721
+67.4%
Atom C3338 1028

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.09 0.65
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 8 Watt

Phenom X4 9650 has a 67.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Atom C3338, on the other hand, has a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1087.5% lower power consumption.

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.

Vote for your favorite

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


AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650
Intel Atom C3338
Atom C3338

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.


3.8 224 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Atom C3338 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom X4 9650 or Atom C3338, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.