Intel Atom x7213RE vs Intel Core i7-10870H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data in this comparison leaves no ambiguity about the overall performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i7-10870H wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, taking all five comparisons by a massive margin.

The largest gaps appear in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i7-10870H scores 11,852 points against the Atom x7213RE's 2,244, a difference of 81.1%. The same delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Core i7 posts 4,977 versus 942, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 1,194 against 226. Across all three multi-core Cinebench versions, the Core i7-10870H is consistently 81.1% ahead, which indicates a near-linear scaling advantage that holds regardless of the workload length or rendering complexity.

Single-core results tell a similar story, though the percentage gap is nearly identical. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core i7-10870H scores 1,673 while the Atom x7213RE manages 316, a difference of 81.1%. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 702 versus 132, also an 81.2% gap. The consistency of these deltas across single and multi-threaded tests suggests the Core i7's advantage is not merely core-count scaling but a fundamental per-thread performance lead as well.

Looking at the broader database averages, the two processors sit surprisingly close in aggregate percentile terms. The Atom x7213RE records an average benchmark score of 3,520 and sits at the 55th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i7-10870H has an average score of 3,446 and sits at the 54th percentile. Despite the Core i7 winning every head-to-head test, the Atom's average is actually slightly higher in the database overall. This is because the Atom's benchmark suite includes Passmark tests where it posts competitive numbers, while the Core i7's suite includes heavier Geekbench and 3DMark workloads.

The nearest rival data reinforces this oddity. The Atom x7213RE's closest competitors include the Intel Core i3-12300T with an average score of 3,525, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT at 3,515, and the Intel Xeon W-2135 at 3,530. The Core i7-10870H sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 5600HS at 3,447, the AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS at 3,444, and the Intel Core i7-5960X at 3,442. In short, the Atom's average score places it in the same performance neighborhood as desktop and high-end laptop chips from a few generations back, while the Core i7's average is comparable to mid-range Ryzen mobile parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design philosophies. The Intel Atom x7213RE uses the Amston Lake architecture built on a 10 nm process node, with two cores and two threads. Its core design is based on the Gracemont microarchitecture, which favors power efficiency and compact die area over raw throughput. The Core i7-10870H, by contrast, uses the Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm node, with eight cores and sixteen threads. It belongs to the Core 10th Gen family and uses the Comet Lake-H core design, which prioritizes high clock speeds and multi-threaded capability.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Atom x7213RE has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i7-10870H has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i7's per-core L2 is four times larger, and its total L3 is more than double, which helps explain its dominance in workloads that repeatedly access a working set larger than a few megabytes.

Memory support also splits the two. The Atom x7213RE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with a single-channel memory bus rated at 38.4 GB/s. The Core i7-10870H supports DDR4 only, and the database does not record a memory bus width or bandwidth figure for it. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The Atom uses an Intel BGA 1264 socket, while the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1440, so they are not interchangeable on any motherboard.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The Atom x7213RE provides PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes available from the CPU, while the Core i7-10870H provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on both: the Atom includes UHD Graphics with 16 execution units, while the Core i7 includes a UHD Graphics solution without a listed EU count.

The thermal design points reflect their intended roles. The Atom x7213RE has a TDP of 9 watts, while the Core i7-10870H has a TDP of 45 watts. That fivefold difference in power envelope explains the performance gap and positions the Atom for fanless or ultra-low-power designs, whereas the Core i7 demands a serious cooling solution.

The Core i7-10870H was released in September 2020. The Atom x7213RE was released in April 2024. Both remain in active production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

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

A: The Core i7-10870H is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 11,852 versus 2,244 for the Atom x7213RE, a gap of 81.1%. The same margin appears in Cinebench R20 and R15 multi-core tests.

Q: Does the Atom x7213RE win any benchmark at all?

A: In the head-to-head comparison data, no. The Core i7-10870H wins all five recorded head-to-head tests. However, the Atom's overall average benchmark score in the database is 3,520, slightly higher than the Core i7's 3,446, because their benchmark suites differ.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Atom x7213RE has a TDP of 9 watts, while the Core i7-10870H has a TDP of 45 watts. The Atom is designed for very low power operation, while the Core i7 needs substantially more power and cooling.

Q: Can I use the same motherboard for both?

A: No. The Atom x7213RE uses Intel BGA 1264, and the Core i7-10870H uses Intel BGA 1440. They are physically incompatible.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: The Atom x7213RE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core i7-10870H supports DDR4 only.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Atom x7213RE has 2 cores and 2 threads. The Core i7-10870H has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Atom x7213RE and the Intel Core i7-10870H:

• Cores: 2 (Atom) versus 8 (Core i7)
• Threads: 2 (Atom) versus 16 (Core i7)
• Base clock: 2.00 GHz (Atom) versus 2.20 GHz (Core i7)
• Boost clock: 3.40 GHz (Atom) versus 5.00 GHz (Core i7)
• TDP: 9 watts (Atom) versus 45 watts (Core i7)
• Socket: Intel BGA 1264 (Atom) versus Intel BGA 1440 (Core i7)
• Architecture: Amston Lake (Atom) versus Comet Lake (Core i7)
• Process node: 10 nm (Atom) versus 14 nm (Core i7)
• L1 cache: 96 KB per core (Atom) versus 64 KB per core (Core i7)
• L2 cache: 2 MB shared (Atom) versus 256 KB per core (Core i7)
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared (Atom) versus 16 MB shared (Core i7)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Atom) versus DDR4 (Core i7)
• Memory bus: Single-channel (Atom) versus not recorded (Core i7)
• Memory bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s (Atom) versus not recorded (Core i7)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 9 lanes (Atom) versus Gen 3, 16 lanes (Core i7)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 16EU (Atom) versus UHD Graphics (Core i7)
• Release date: April 2024 (Atom) versus September 2020 (Core i7)
• Launch MSRP: $42 (Atom) versus not recorded (Core i7)
• Part number: SRNEP (Atom) versus SRK3Y (Core i7)

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Core i7-10870H is the superior processor for any workload that demands compute throughput. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by roughly 81%, and its 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock gives it a massive advantage in rendering, compilation, and other parallel tasks. The Atom x7213RE cannot compete in raw performance, and the benchmark results do not suggest any scenario where it would outperform the Core i7 in a direct comparison.

The Atom x7213RE's role is different. Its 9 watt TDP, support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and 2024 release date indicate it is built for low-power embedded or mobile applications where energy efficiency matters more than speed. Its 2-core, 2-thread design and modest cache sizes are appropriate for lightweight tasks such as industrial control, passive-cooled systems, or battery-sensitive devices. The database shows its average score lands at the 55th percentile, which is respectable for such a low-power part, but that average is carried by Passmark tests that do not appear in the Core i7's benchmark set.

For a PC builder choosing between these two, the decision depends entirely on the use case. If the system must run heavy software, multi-threaded workloads, or high-refresh gaming, the Core i7-10870H is the only rational choice. If the system must run on minimal power, fit in a constrained thermal envelope, or operate in a fanless chassis, the Atom x7213RE is the appropriate part, accepting its performance limitations.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i7-10870H wins in every measured compute category. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all go to the Core i7 by 81.1%. Single-core Cinebench tests also go to the Core i7, with deltas of 81.1% and 81.2%. Any workload that relies on CPU rendering, video encoding, software compilation, or scientific computation will favor the Core i7. Its 16 MB of L3 cache and 16 threads give it the resources to handle large, parallel jobs without bottlenecking.

The Atom x7213RE does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but it has structural advantages that matter outside of raw speed. Its 9 watt TDP allows deployment in systems where the Core i7's 45 watt TDP would be impossible to cool. Its dual memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 provides flexibility for system designers. Its 10 nm process node and Gracemont architecture make it a modern, efficient part for low-power applications. The 55th percentile average score indicates it performs adequately relative to the broader CPU landscape, even if it falls far behind the Core i7 in this specific matchup.

The practical recommendation from the data: choose the Core i7-10870H for performance-critical mobile workstations, and choose the Atom x7213RE for power-constrained embedded systems where the 9 watt envelope is a hard requirement. Neither processor is a substitute for the other.