Intel Atom C5315 vs Intel Core i3-6100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Atom C5315 wins every recorded benchmark comparison against the Intel Core i3-6100. Across five Cinebench tests, the Atom C5315 holds a consistent advantage of roughly 12% in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Core i3-6100 does not secure a single win in the head-to-head results.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Atom C5315 scores 255 against the Core i3-6100's 224, a delta of 12.2%. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 1063 for the Atom C5315 versus 934 for the Core i3-6100, a 12.1% gap. The single-core results follow the same trend, with the Atom C5315 leading 149 to 131 in R20 single-core and 357 to 314 in R23 single-core, both at approximately 12.1% and 12% deltas respectively.

The most substantial difference appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Atom C5315 scores 2533 against the Core i3-6100's 2226. This 307-point gap represents the largest absolute margin in the recorded data. Interestingly, the Atom C5315 achieves this multi-core lead despite having only four threads, the same thread count as the Core i3-6100, though the Atom uses four physical cores versus two physical cores with hyper-threading on the Intel side.

The benchmark data places both processors in a similar overall performance tier. The Core i3-6100 sits at the 24th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Atom C5315 sits at the 23rd percentile. Their average benchmark scores are close as well: 888 for the Core i3-6100 and 871 for the Atom C5315. However, the head-to-head Cinebench results consistently favor the Atom C5315, indicating that its lower average score is influenced by factors outside the Cinebench suite, such as the Geekbench tests where the Core i3-6100 has recorded results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i3-6100 is a Skylake architecture desktop part built on Intel's 14 nm process node, featuring 1,400 million transistors on a 150 mm² die. The Intel Atom C5315 belongs to the Parker Ridge codename family, uses the Tremont generation architecture, and is manufactured on a 10 nm process node. This newer, denser process allows the Atom C5315 to pack four physical cores into a lower 38 W TDP, compared to the Core i3-6100's 51 W TDP with only two physical cores.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Core i3-6100 has 2 cores and 4 threads, relying on hyper-threading to reach four concurrent threads. The Atom C5315 has 4 cores and 4 threads, using its physical core count directly. Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache is substantially different: the Core i3-6100 has 256 KB per core, while the Atom C5315 has 4.5 MB per module. The Core i3-6100 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Atom C5315 has no L3 cache recorded in the database.

Memory support shows both processors support DDR4 and dual-channel memory buses. The Core i3-6100 has a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Atom C5315 achieves 38.4 GB/s. The Atom C5315 also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Core i3-6100. This aligns with their market segments: the Core i3-6100 is a Desktop part, while the Atom C5315 targets Server/Workstation deployments.

PCIe connectivity differs in lane count. The Core i3-6100 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Atom C5315 offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also separate the two: the Core i3-6100 includes Intel HD 530, while the Atom C5315 has no integrated graphics (N/A).

The release dates are seven years apart. The Core i3-6100 launched on August 31, 2015, while the Atom C5315 launched on June 5, 2022. Both processors remain in active production status. The Core i3-6100 uses socket Intel Socket 1151, while the Atom C5315 uses Intel BGA 2106, reflecting their different physical mounting requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score?

A: The Intel Atom C5315 leads in single-core performance. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 149 against the Core i3-6100's 131, and in R23 single-core, it scores 357 versus 314. Both deltas are approximately 12% in favor of the Atom C5315.

Q: How do the multi-core scores compare?

A: The Atom C5315 wins all multi-core tests. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 255 versus 224, R20 shows 1063 versus 934, and R23 shows 2533 versus 2226. The Atom C5315's advantage ranges from 12.1% to 12.2% across these tests.

Q: Does the Core i3-6100 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Core i3-6100 includes Intel HD 530 integrated graphics. The Atom C5315 has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A in the database.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Atom C5315 supports ECC memory, while the Core i3-6100 does not. This makes the Atom C5315 more suitable for server or workstation environments where error-correcting memory is required.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The Core i3-6100 has a TDP of 51 W, while the Atom C5315 has a TDP of 38 W. The Atom C5315 delivers higher benchmark scores while consuming less power according to these specifications.

Q: How many physical cores does each processor have?

A: The Core i3-6100 has 2 physical cores with 4 threads (using hyper-threading), while the Atom C5315 has 4 physical cores with 4 threads. The Atom C5315 does not rely on hyper-threading to reach its thread count.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear verdict: the Intel Atom C5315 is the stronger performer in every recorded Cinebench benchmark. It wins all five head-to-head tests with a consistent 12% margin. For workloads that rely on Cinebench-style rendering or single-threaded responsiveness, the Atom C5315 is the superior choice.

The Core i3-6100 retains relevance in specific contexts. Its integrated graphics (Intel HD 530) provide a display output capability that the Atom C5315 completely lacks. For a desktop system without a discrete GPU, the Core i3-6100 is functional out of the box, while the Atom C5315 requires a separate graphics solution.

The ECC memory support on the Atom C5315, combined with its server/workstation market segment and lower 38 W TDP, positions it for reliability-focused deployments. The Core i3-6100, with its desktop segment and 51 W TDP, fits general consumer use.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (888 for the Core i3-6100, 871 for the Atom C5315), and their percentile rankings are adjacent (24th versus 23rd). However, the direct Cinebench comparisons favor the Atom C5315 without exception. Users prioritizing raw Cinebench performance should select the Atom C5315. Users needing integrated graphics should select the Core i3-6100.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-6100 | Intel Atom C5315 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| TDP | 51 W | 38 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | Intel BGA 2106 |

| Codename | Skylake | Parker Ridge |

| Generation | Core i3 (Skylake) | Atom (Tremont) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 150 mm² | Not recorded |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 4.5 MB (per module) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | Not present |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 8 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 530 | N/A |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2015-08-31 | 2022-06-05 |

| Part Number | SR2HG | SRL3Y |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Atom C5315 wins in every measured benchmark category. Its 12% lead across all Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks. The higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) and ECC support further strengthen its case for server workloads. Its lower TDP of 38 W makes it more power-efficient per unit of performance. The newer 10 nm process node and 2022 release date indicate a more modern design.

The Intel Core i3-6100 wins in integrated graphics capability. The Intel HD 530 provides a built-in display solution, which the Atom C5315 lacks entirely. The higher base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 2.40 GHz may also benefit scenarios where clock speed directly influences performance outside the recorded benchmarks, though the Cinebench data shows the Atom C5315 overcoming this clock disadvantage. The Core i3-6100's 16 PCIe lanes double the Atom C5315's 8 lanes, which could matter for systems with multiple expansion cards.

The Core i3-6100 also holds a slight edge in average benchmark score (888 versus 871) and percentile ranking (24th versus 23rd), but these aggregate metrics do not translate into wins in any direct head-to-head test. For users building a desktop with integrated graphics, the Core i3-6100 is the practical choice. For users building a server or workstation where ECC memory, lower power draw, and higher multi-threaded performance matter, the Atom C5315 is the superior option.