Intel Atom C5315 vs Intel Core i7-860 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Core i7-860 across every recorded Cinebench test. In the multi-core Cinebench R15 test, the i7-860 scores 259 against 255 for the Atom C5315, a 1.6% lead. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i7-860 records 1081 points versus 1063 for the Atom, a 1.7% margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-860 posts 2574 points, while the Atom C5315 manages 2533, again a 1.6% difference.

Single-core results follow the same direction. The i7-860 scores 152 in Cinebench R20 single-core, beating the Atom's 149 by 2%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-860 scores 363 against 357, a 1.7% edge. Across all five head-to-head comparisons, the i7-860 wins every test. The largest single margin is the 2% gap in Cinebench R20 single-core, while the other four tests cluster tightly between 1.6% and 1.7%.

The average benchmark scores place the two processors nearly level in the broader database. The i7-860 has an average score of 886, while the Atom C5315 averages 871. This places the i7-860 in the 24th percentile of all CPUs, and the Atom in the 23rd percentile. The i7-860's nearest rivals include the AMD PRO A8-8650B at 887 (-0.1%), the Intel Pentium G4560T at 887 (-0.1%), the Intel Xeon X5550 at 888 (-0.2%), and the Intel Core i3-6100 at 888 (-0.3%). The Atom C5315's nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon PRO 3045B at 872 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i7-3540M at 867 (0.5%), the Intel Xeon X3460 at 866 (0.5%), and the Intel Core i3-5157U at 877 (-0.7%).

These deltas show that both processors sit in a dense performance cluster where a few points separate adjacent parts. The i7-860's 1.6% to 2% wins over the Atom are real but modest; they do not represent a generational leap in raw throughput. Instead, the data indicates that despite the 13-year gap in release dates, the two chips deliver nearly equivalent Cinebench performance in the database's recorded runs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is substantial, even though benchmark scores are close. The Intel Core i7-860 uses the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Lynnfield, built on Intel's 45 nm process. It integrates 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. The Atom C5315 is based on the Tremont microarchitecture, codenamed Parker Ridge, fabricated on a 10 nm process. The database lists no transistor count or die size for the Atom.

Core counts match at four physical cores, but threading differs. The i7-860 supports 8 threads through Hyper-Threading, while the Atom C5315 runs 4 threads with no simultaneous multithreading. This explains why the i7-860's lead in multi-core tests is slightly larger than its single-core edge in several cases, though the differences remain small.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both parts share a 64 KB L1 cache per core. The i7-860 has a 256 KB L2 cache per core and an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The Atom C5315 instead uses a 4.5 MB L2 cache per module, with no L3 cache listed. This is a fundamental design difference: the desktop Nehalem part relies on a large shared L3, while the Atom's Tremont design aggregates L2 capacity across modules.

Memory support differs by generation. The i7-860 uses DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC support. The Atom C5315 uses DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s and ECC support enabled. The Atom's memory bandwidth figure is notable for a low-power server part, and ECC support points to its intended role in reliability-focused workloads.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The i7-860 provides PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Atom C5315 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes. The newer standard and lower lane count reflect the Atom's compact server/embedded positioning, while the i7-860's wider lane allocation was typical for a desktop platform of its era.

Other differences include integrated graphics: the i7-860 has none listed, and the Atom C5315 lists integrated graphics as "N/A." The i7-860 uses the Intel Socket 1156, while the Atom C5315 uses Intel BGA 2106, a soldered package. The i7-860's production status is end-of-life, with a release date of 2009-09-07, while the Atom C5315 is active, released 2022-06-05. The i7-860 carries part number SLBJJ; the Atom C5315 carries SRL3Y. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i7-860 wins with a score of 2574 versus 2533 for the Intel Atom C5315, a 1.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Atom C5315 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Atom C5315 supports ECC memory and uses DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-860 does not support ECC and uses DDR3.

Q: How do the thread counts differ between the two CPUs?

A: The Intel Core i7-860 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Atom C5315 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A: The Intel Core i7-860 has an average benchmark score of 886, placing it in the 24th percentile. The Intel Atom C5315 has an average score of 871, placing it in the 23rd percentile.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i7-860 has an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel Atom C5315 has no L3 cache listed; it instead provides a 4.5 MB L2 cache per module.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two chips?

A: The Intel Core i7-860 is built on a 45 nm process. The Intel Atom C5315 is built on a 10 nm process.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a narrow but consistent victory for the Intel Core i7-860 in all five Cinebench tests. Any user prioritizing raw single-threaded or multi-threaded Cinebench scores should select the i7-860, as it leads by 1.6% to 2% across the board. The i7-860 also holds a higher average benchmark score (886 versus 871) and a slightly better percentile ranking (24th versus 23rd).

However, the architectural and platform differences matter more than the small benchmark delta. The Atom C5315 brings ECC memory support, DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe Gen 3, and a 10 nm process with a 38 W TDP. The i7-860 uses DDR3, lacks ECC, and has a 95 W TDP on a 45 nm process. For a server or workstation workload that requires ECC memory and lower power consumption, the Atom C5315 is the appropriate choice despite its slightly lower Cinebench scores. Its active production status also means it remains available, while the i7-860 is end-of-life.

For desktop users who only care about Cinebench performance and do not need ECC, the i7-860 is the stronger pick based on the data. But the margins are small enough that real-world differences will be difficult to perceive outside of synthetic benchmarks. The Atom's feature set, particularly ECC and modern memory support, shifts the decision toward the Atom for infrastructure roles, even though it trails in every recorded benchmark.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-860 | Intel Atom C5315 |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.80 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.47 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 95 W | 38 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | Intel BGA 2106 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | None listed |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Parker Ridge |

| Generation | Core i7 (Lynnfield) | Atom (Tremont) |

| Process node | 45 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 774 million | None listed |

| Die size | 296 mm² | None listed |

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

| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | None listed |

| Memory support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory bandwidth | None listed | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | None listed | N/A |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2009-09-07 | 2022-06-05 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | $213 |

| Part number | SLBJJ | SRL3Y |