AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 vs Intel Atom x7213RE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data paints a stark picture: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins all five shared Cinebench tests, with no test favoring the Intel Atom x7213RE. The margin is not merely consistent; it is enormous, hovering around 457% in every workload. This is not a close contest, but a generational and architectural chasm.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 scores 1259 against the Atom's 226, a delta of 457.1%. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD part posts 5246 versus 942, a 456.9% advantage. Single-core performance tells the same story: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the Ryzen scores 740, while the Atom manages only 132, a 460.6% delta. The largest percentage gap in the dataset appears in that single-core test.

Cinebench R23 results align perfectly with the trend. The AMD chip scores 12491 in multi-core, dwarfing the Atom's 2244, a 456.6% lead. In R23 single-core, the Ryzen hits 1763, versus 316 for the Atom, a 457.9% delta. Every head-to-head metric shows the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 at roughly 5.5 times the performance of the Atom x7213RE. The data shows no workload where the Atom's lower power draw or newer process node translates into a performance win.

The average benchmark scores from the broader database corroborate these direct comparisons. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has an average benchmark score of 3613, placing it at the 55th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2276G (score 3614, delta 0%), the Intel Xeon E-2286G (score 3610, delta 0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 2700E (score 3603, delta 0.3%). The Atom x7213RE, despite also sitting at the 55th percentile, has a lower average score of 3520. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12300T (score 3525, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Xeon W-2135 (score 3530, delta -0.3%). Both CPUs occupy the same percentile ranking, but the Ryzen does so with a higher absolute average score, and the Atom's rivals are all mainstream desktop parts, not embedded or low-power chips.

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is faster in every recorded Cinebench test. The Atom x7213RE has zero wins in the shared benchmark suite. The performance differential is so wide that it suggests entirely different use cases, not just different performance tiers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 scores 12491, which is 456.6% higher than the Intel Atom x7213RE's score of 2244.

Q: How does single-core performance compare between the two?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 scores 1763, while the Atom x7213RE scores 316. This represents a 457.9% advantage for the AMD part.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has an average benchmark score of 3613. The Atom x7213RE has an average benchmark score of 3520.

Q: Do both CPUs rank at the same percentile of all CPUs?

A: Yes, both are listed at the 55th percentile. However, the Ryzen achieves this with a higher average score (3613 versus 3520).

Q: What are the closest rivals to each CPU in the database?

A: The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E-2276G, with a score of 3614 and a delta of 0%. The Atom x7213RE's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-12300T, with a score of 3525 and a delta of -0.1%.

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins all five shared Cinebench tests. The Intel Atom x7213RE wins none.

The Verdict

The data dictates a clear choice for any workload that prioritizes raw compute throughput. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is the superior processor in every measured Cinebench test, both multi-core and single-core. Its 8 cores and 16 threads deliver a multi-core score of 12491 in Cinebench R23, a figure that is over five times the Atom's 2244. For rendering, compilation, or any parallel task, the Ryzen is the only rational option based on the recorded benchmarks.

The Intel Atom x7213RE, on the other hand, presents a different profile. It consumes only 9 watts TDP compared to the Ryzen's 65 watts, and it integrates UHD Graphics 16EU, which the Ryzen lacks entirely. Its single-channel memory bus and 2 MB shared L2 cache indicate a design aimed at low-power, space-constrained, or fanless systems. The Atom's average benchmark score of 3520, while close to the Ryzen's 3613 in the database's overall ranking, is not comparable in raw speed; its nearest rivals are mainstream Intel Core i3 parts, not high-core-count workstation chips.

The verdict is not about which CPU is "better" in a vacuum, but about which data supports which role. If the requirement is maximum processing power for multi-threaded applications, the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins decisively. If the requirement is minimal power draw with integrated graphics and a mobile form factor, the Atom x7213RE is the only one of the two that meets that profile. The benchmark data shows the Ryzen is faster, but the specification data shows the Atom is designed for a different environment. There is no overlap in their performance envelopes.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every fundamental specification. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Atom x7213RE has 2 cores and 2 threads. The Ryzen's base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 3.70 GHz; the Atom's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost of 3.40 GHz. Thermal design power is a major divider: the Ryzen is rated at 65 watts, the Atom at just 9 watts.

The sockets are incompatible. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4, while the Atom is soldered to Intel BGA 1264. Memory support differs as well: the Ryzen supports DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but operates on a single-channel bus with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Ryzen supports ECC memory; the Atom does not.

PCIe lane counts also diverge. The Ryzen provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, whereas the Atom provides Gen 3 with only 9 lanes. Integrated graphics are present only on the Atom, with UHD Graphics 16EU; the Ryzen has no integrated graphics listed. The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier, while the Atom is locked. The release dates are far apart: the Ryzen launched on 2017-06-28, and the Atom on 2024-04-07. The Atom has a launch MSRP of $42, while the Ryzen's launch MSRP is not recorded.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Summit Ridge, and belongs to the 1000 series generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Atom x7213RE uses the Amston Lake architecture, which belongs to the Atom generation built on Gracemont cores. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, though its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations illustrate the different design philosophies. Both CPUs have 96 KB of L1 cache per core. The Ryzen has 512 KB of L2 per core, while the Atom has 2 MB of shared L2. The L3 cache is far larger on the Ryzen: 16 MB shared, versus 6 MB shared on the Atom. The Ryzen's cache hierarchy is designed for high-core-count throughput, while the Atom's smaller, shared caches reflect a low-power efficiency focus.

The memory controllers reflect the same split. The Ryzen runs dual-channel DDR4 with a 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, which feeds its 8-core design. The Atom runs single-channel DDR4 or DDR5 with 38.4 GB/s, a configuration that matches its 2-core, low-power mobile target. The Ryzen's ECC memory support suits workstation or server duties, while the Atom's lack of ECC and inclusion of integrated graphics point toward embedded or client applications. The Ryzen is a desktop part with an active production status; the Atom is a mobile part, also active. The Ryzen's socket is upgradeable on AM4 platforms, while the Atom's BGA 1264 is a soldered, non-upgradeable design. The process node difference, 14 nm versus 10 nm, does not translate into a performance advantage for the Atom in any recorded benchmark.