AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 vs Intel Atom x7211RE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload type. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 wins every recorded head-to-head comparison, with all five Cinebench tests favoring the AMD part. The Intel Atom x7211RE does not record a single victory in the shared benchmark set. That does not mean the Atom is without purpose, but its strengths are not visible in the multi-threaded rendering workloads that dominate the head-to-head list.

The Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 is the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks. Its six cores and twelve threads give it a structural advantage in any workload that scales with parallel execution. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 10058 against 1804 shows a processor that can sustain heavy all-core loads. Single-thread performance also favors AMD, with a R23 single-core score of 1419 versus 254, so even lightly threaded applications run faster on the Ryzen.

The Atom x7211RE, by contrast, is a low-power embedded part. Its 6 W TDP against the Ryzen's 65 W TDP tells the story of a chip designed for efficiency, not throughput. The PassMark results recorded for the Atom (data compression, encryption, integer math, floating point math, and others) have no corresponding Ryzen entries in the database, so direct comparison in those tests is impossible. But the Cinebench numbers alone indicate that the Atom is not competing in the same performance class.

The wins distribution, 5 for AMD and 0 for Intel, is unambiguous. Every benchmark where both processors have recorded scores ends with the Ryzen ahead by a large margin. The practical conclusion: choose the Ryzen for any application where CPU performance matters, and consider the Atom only where its power envelope or embedded features take priority.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Summit Ridge, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 4,800 million transistors into a 192 mm² die. The Intel Atom x7211RE uses the Amston Lake architecture with Gracemont cores, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The Atom's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Ryzen offers 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Atom offers 2 cores and 2 threads. That 6x core advantage and 6x thread advantage explains much of the performance gap. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Atom has 96 KB of L1 per core, but only 2 MB of shared L2 and 6 MB of shared L3. The Atom's L2 is shared rather than per-core, and its total cache pool is much smaller.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The Ryzen runs at a 3.20 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.60 GHz. The Atom has a 1.00 GHz base clock but boosts to 3.20 GHz. The boost behavior matters: the Atom can reach near-Ryzen clocks in short bursts, but its two cores and small cache prevent sustained performance.

Memory support differs as well. The Ryzen uses DDR4 with a dual-channel memory bus. The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but only on a single-channel bus. The Atom does record a memory bandwidth figure of 38.4 GB/s, while the Ryzen's bandwidth is not listed. Single-channel memory limits the Atom in bandwidth-sensitive workloads, although its low power target likely does not demand much bandwidth.

The Atom includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 16EU) and PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The Ryzen has no integrated graphics listed and no PCIe information in the database. The Atom's socket is Intel BGA 1264, a soldered embedded form factor, while the Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4, a socketed desktop design. The Ryzen also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Atom does not. The Atom's launch MSRP is $42. The Ryzen's launch MSRP is not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are decisive. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 1013 against the Atom's 181, a delta of 459.7% in favor of AMD. That is not a marginal gap; it is a five-fold difference. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 4224 versus 757, a 458% delta. R23 multi-core continues the trend with 10058 versus 1804, a 457.5% delta. The Ryzen's multi-threaded dominance is consistent across all three Cinebench versions.

Single-core results are equally lopsided. In R20 single-core, the Ryzen scores 595 against the Atom's 106, a 461.3% delta. In R23 single-core, the Ryzen scores 1419 against 254, a 458.7% delta. The consistency of these percentages, all hovering near 460%, suggests the gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The Ryzen's Zen cores simply execute instructions faster than the Atom's Gracemont cores, and the Ryzen's higher base clock reinforces that advantage in single-threaded work.

The largest single delta in the shared set is the R20 single-core test at 461.3%. The smallest is R23 multi-core at 457.5%. Even the smallest gap is enormous. The data shows no scenario in the recorded benchmarks where the Atom comes close to the Ryzen. The Atom's PassMark scores, such as 20820 in data compression or 6517 in integer math, have no Ryzen counterparts in the database, so they cannot be placed in direct context. But the Cinebench results alone establish a clear hierarchy.

One note on the Atom's PassMark data: the single-thread test appears twice in the database with identical scores (1317 in both "passmark_single_thread" and "passmark_singlethread"), which suggests a duplicate entry. The analysis here treats them as the same measurement.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most buyers. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 is dramatically faster in every recorded shared benchmark. If the workload involves rendering, compilation, simulation, or any CPU-intensive task, the Ryzen is the only rational choice between these two. Its 6 cores and 12 threads, combined with a 3.20 GHz base clock and 16 MB of L3 cache, deliver performance that the Atom cannot approach.

The Intel Atom x7211RE has a different role. Its 6 W TDP is a fraction of the Ryzen's 65 W TDP. For fanless embedded systems, battery-powered devices, or applications where heat and power budgets are tight, the Atom's efficiency may outweigh its performance deficit. Its integrated UHD Graphics 16EU and PCIe Gen 3 lanes also make it suitable for compact industrial or edge deployments where the Ryzen would require a discrete GPU and more substantial cooling.

The Ryzen's unlocked multiplier and socketed AM4 design appeal to users who want flexibility. The Atom's BGA 1264 socket is soldered, meaning it is not upgradeable. The Ryzen is a desktop part from 2017, still in active production. The Atom is a mobile embedded part from 2024, also active. The database percentile rankings put both at 51st percentile versus all CPUs, an odd coincidence that reflects the different benchmark distributions each part participates in.

Strictly from the data: pick the Ryzen for performance, pick the Atom for power efficiency and embedded integration. There is no recorded scenario where the Atom wins a shared benchmark, so any performance-first use case defaults to AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 wins all recorded multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 10058 versus the Atom's 1804, a 457.5% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Atom x7211RE beat the Ryzen in any benchmark?

A: No. In the five shared head-to-head benchmarks, the Ryzen wins all five. The Atom has no recorded victories in the shared test set.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Atom has a 6 W TDP, while the Ryzen has a 65 W TDP. The Atom uses roughly one-tenth the power budget, though this comes with a large performance cost.

Q: Can the Intel Atom be overclocked?

A: No. The Atom has a locked multiplier. The Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 has an unlocked multiplier, so it can be overclocked on compatible AM4 motherboards.

Q: What memory types do they support?

A: The Ryzen supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus. The Atom supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus, and the database records a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s for the Atom.

Q: Do either of these processors include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Atom includes integrated graphics, listed as UHD Graphics 16EU. The Ryzen's integrated graphics field is not recorded, meaning it likely requires a discrete GPU.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 | Intel Atom x7211RE |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 2 |

| Threads | 12 | 2 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 1.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 6 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Architecture | Zen | Amston Lake |

| Codename | Zen | Amston Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen 5 (Zen, Summit Ridge) | Atom (Gracemont) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 192 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB per core | 96 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB per core | 2 MB shared |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 38.4 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Not recorded | UHD Graphics 16EU |

| PCIe | Not recorded | Gen 3, 9 lanes (CPU only) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2017-06-28 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $42 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | YD160BBBM6IAE | SRNET |