CPU Comparison

The Intel Atom P5342 and Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 are both server/workstation processors, but they come from opposite ends of Intel's design philosophy. The Atom is a modern, power-efficient 16-core part built on a 10nm process, while the Xeon is an older, high-frequency 8-core part from the Haswell era. Benchmark data shows a remarkably close contest, with the Xeon edging out the Atom in every single Cinebench test, though the margins are consistently slim. This comparison is less about a clear winner and more about understanding the trade-offs between core count, clock speed, and platform features.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is decisive in one sense: the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 wins all six Cinebench comparisons. However, the magnitude of those wins is almost negligible. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1137 against the Atom's 1121, a delta of just -1.4%. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: 160 for the Xeon versus 158 for the Atom, a -1.2% difference. These are margins that would be imperceptible in real-world use.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the results tighten further. The Xeon's multi-core score of 4741 beats the Atom's 4671 by only -1.5%. Single-core R20 sees the Xeon at 669 against the Atom's 659, again a -1.5% gap. The trend continues in Cinebench R23, the heaviest workload in the set. The Xeon scores 11289 multi-core and 1593 single-core, while the Atom manages 11122 and 1570, respectively. Both deltas sit at -1.4% and -1.5%. This consistency is telling: the Xeon has a slight but uniform advantage across all rendering workloads, likely due to its higher base and boost clocks.

The average benchmark scores reflect this overall parity. The Atom P5342 has an average score of 3217, while the Xeon E5-1680 v3 averages 3265. That is a difference of roughly 1.5%, which places both CPUs in the 53rd percentile of all processors. The Atom's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5350GE and AMD Ryzen 7 4800U, both with an average score of 3218. The Xeon's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v4 at 3264. These context points show that both chips sit in the same performance tier, regardless of their architectural differences.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows that the Xeon E5-1680 v3 wins every benchmark, but that does not mean it is the right choice for every scenario. Its victories are narrow, and the Atom P5342 brings other attributes to the table that the benchmark scores do not capture. For pure multi-threaded rendering, the Xeon has a slight edge, but the Atom's 16 cores nearly compensate for its lower clock speed. If you are running sustained Cinebench-style loads, the Xeon will finish marginally faster, but the difference is within the noise of thermal throttling or background processes.

The Atom P5342 wins on platform efficiency. It has a TDP of 71 watts versus the Xeon's 140 watts, meaning it delivers nearly the same performance at half the power draw. This makes the Atom a stronger candidate for dense, power-constrained server environments where heat dissipation and electricity costs are primary concerns. Its active production status also matters; the Atom is still a current product, while the Xeon is end-of-life. For new deployments, the Atom offers a path forward, whereas the Xeon is a legacy part.

The Xeon E5-1680 v3 wins on raw memory bandwidth and PCIe connectivity. It supports quad-channel DDR4 with a peak bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, compared to the Atom's dual-channel 42.7 GB/s. It also provides 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, versus the Atom's 16. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive or require many expansion cards, the Xeon's platform is significantly more capable. Its unlocked multiplier is another advantage, allowing for overclocking that the Atom cannot offer.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is substantial. The Atom P5342 is built on Intel's 10nm process and uses the Tremont microarchitecture, codenamed Snow Ridge. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no hyper-threading. Its cache layout is unusual: 64 KB of L1 per core and 4.5 MB of L2 per module. The Xeon E5-1680 v3, by contrast, is a 22nm Haswell-EP part with 8 cores and 16 threads, using hyper-threading to reach thread parity with the Atom. It has a more conventional cache setup: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache.

The process node difference is the most critical factor. The 10nm Atom can pack more cores into a lower power envelope, while the 22nm Xeon relies on higher clock speeds. The Xeon's base clock of 3.20 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz dwarf the Atom's fixed 2.20 GHz. The Atom has no boost clock at all, which explains why its single-core scores lag slightly behind. The Xeon also has a larger physical footprint with a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors, whereas the Atom's die size and transistor count are not specified.

Memory and I/O also diverge sharply. The Atom uses a dual-channel memory bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth and supports DDR4. The Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, which is essential for server reliability. The Atom has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the Xeon has 40. The sockets are incompatible: the Atom uses Intel BGA 2106 (soldered), and the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The Xeon's multiplier is unlocked, a feature absent on the Atom.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 scores 11289, while the Intel Atom P5342 scores 11122. The Xeon leads by -1.5%, making it the faster part, but the margin is very small.

Q: Does the Atom P5342 have a boost clock?

A: No. The Atom's base clock is 2.20 GHz and the the benchmark database lists no boost clock. The Xeon E5-1680 v3 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Atom P5342 has an average benchmark score of 3217, and the Xeon E5-1680 v3 averages 3265. Both are in the 53rd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v3 supports 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Atom P5342 supports 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only).

Q: Is the Xeon E5-1680 v3 still in production?

A: No. The Xeon E5-1680 v3 is marked as end-of-life. The Atom P5342 has an active production status.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v3 has an unlocked multiplier, so it can be overclocked. The Atom P5342 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow victory for the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 in raw performance. It wins all six Cinebench tests, has a higher average score, and offers superior memory bandwidth and PCIe lane count. For anyone building a workstation that relies on heavy multi-threaded rendering and needs maximum expansion capability, the Xeon is the better choice, provided that power consumption and platform longevity are not the primary concerns. Its 140 watt TDP is high, but its quad-channel memory and 40 PCIe lanes are unmatched by the Atom.

The Intel Atom P5342 is the smarter pick for new, power-conscious server deployments. It delivers 95% of the Xeon's performance at roughly half the TDP, and its active production status means it will remain available for future builds. The Atom's 16 cores and 16 threads make it competitive in multi-threaded workloads, while its 10nm process ensures better efficiency. For applications that do not need quad-channel memory or many PCIe devices, the Atom's dual-channel bus and 16 lanes are sufficient. The choice comes down to platform priorities: the Xeon for raw throughput and legacy compatibility, the Atom for efficiency and forward-looking deployment.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Atom P5342 | Intel Xeon E5-1680 v3 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 71 W | 140 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2106 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture / Codename | Snow Ridge | Haswell-EP |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 22 nm |

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

| L3 Cache | None | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 68.3 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 40 Lanes |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Unlocked Multiplier | No | Yes |

| Transistors | Not specified | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | Not specified | 356 mm² |