CPU Comparison

The Intel Atom x7213RE and the Intel Xeon E-2246G occupy opposite ends of the Intel spectrum, and the data reflects a stark performance divide. The Atom is a 2-core, 2-thread mobile part built for efficiency, while the Xeon is a 6-core, 12-thread server/workstation processor. Benchmark results show the Xeon winning every head-to-head test, but the Atom’s existence is justified by its drastically lower power envelope and modern platform features. This analysis breaks down where each processor wins, the architectural gulf between them, and what the numbers mean for different use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E-2246G is the clear winner in every measured performance category. Out of five head-to-head benchmarks, the Xeon takes all five, with the Atom failing to secure a single victory. The most significant gaps appear in multi-core workloads, where the Xeon’s 6 cores and 12 threads provide a massive advantage over the Atom’s 2 cores and 2 threads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 11,720 versus the Atom’s 2,244, a delta of -80.9% for the Atom. This makes the Xeon the obvious choice for any processor-bound task like rendering, compilation, or heavy multitasking.

The Intel Atom x7213RE, despite losing all head-to-head tests, wins in the efficiency domain. Its 9W TDP is a fraction of the Xeon’s 80W, making it suitable for fanless designs, embedded systems, and battery-powered mobile devices. The Atom also supports DDR5 memory, while the Xeon is limited to DDR4, and it is built on a newer 10nm process versus the Xeon’s 14nm. For workloads that prioritize low power consumption over raw throughput, like industrial controllers, network appliances, or lightweight edge servers, the Atom’s design goals align better. Its single-thread performance is also not as far behind as the multi-core gap suggests: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the Atom scores 132 versus the Xeon’s 694, a delta of -81%, but the Atom’s boost clock of 3.40 GHz helps it stay competitive in lightly-threaded tasks relative to its core count.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different architectural lineages. The Atom x7213RE is based on the Amston Lake architecture, using Gracemont efficiency cores. It is built on a 10nm process by Intel and features 2 cores and 2 threads. Its cache layout is distinct: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a single-channel configuration, providing 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. It lacks ECC memory support and offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The integrated graphics is UHD Graphics with 16 execution units.

The Xeon E-2246G, in contrast, is a Coffee Lake-S WS part from the Xeon E-2200 series. It uses a 14nm process, which is older than the Atom’s 10nm node. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The cache hierarchy is more conventional for a high-performance part: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 only, but it operates in a dual-channel configuration, yielding 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth, slightly higher than the Atom. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a key feature for server reliability, and provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Its integrated graphics is the HD Graphics P630.

The die size also tells a story: the Xeon’s die is 154 mm², while the Atom’s die size is not listed. The Xeon is an end-of-life product released in May 2019, while the Atom is an active product released in April 2024. The socket differs as well, the Atom uses Intel BGA 1264, suggesting a soldered, low-profile design, while the Xeon uses the more common Socket 1151.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniformly lopsided in favor of the Xeon E-2246G, but the magnitude of the wins varies by workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1,181 against the Atom’s 226, a delta of -80.9%. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (4,922 vs. 942, -80.9%) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,720 vs. 2,244, -80.9%). The consistency of the -80.9% delta across these three multi-core tests suggests the performance gap scales almost linearly with core count and thread count, which is expected given the 3x core advantage and 6x thread advantage for the Xeon.

Single-core benchmarks show a similar but slightly different story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 694 versus the Atom’s 132, a delta of -81%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 1,654 versus the Atom’s 316, again -80.9%. The Xeon’s higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus the Atom’s 3.40 GHz clearly drives this advantage. Even with the Atom’s newer Gracemont cores, the clock speed deficit of 1.40 GHz is too large to overcome.

The data shows no benchmark where the Atom wins, not even in a power-sensitive metric since power consumption is not a benchmark score. The Xeon’s wins are decisive and consistent, making it the superior choice for any performance-critical application. However, the Atom’s defenses rest on its 9W TDP, which is not captured in these tests but is a critical specification for thermal-constrained environments.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2246G has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Atom x7213RE has 2 cores and 2 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Atom x7213RE has a TDP of 9W, while the Xeon E-2246G has a TDP of 80W, a difference of 71W in favor of the Atom.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E-2246G supports ECC memory. The Atom x7213RE does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Xeon E-2246G has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, which is 1.40 GHz higher than the Atom x7213RE’s boost clock of 3.40 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Atom x7213RE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Xeon E-2246G supports only DDR4.

Q: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, what is the score difference?

A: The Xeon E-2246G scores 11,720, and the Atom x7213RE scores 2,244, giving the Xeon an 80.9% advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Atom x7213RE | Intel Xeon E-2246G |

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

| Cores | 2 | 6 |

| Threads | 2 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 9W | 80W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1264 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Amston Lake | Coffee Lake |

| Codename | Amston Lake | Coffee Lake-S WS |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (shared) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 9 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 16EU | HD Graphics P630 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

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

| Release Date | April 2024 | May 2019 |

| Launch MSRP | $42 | $311 |

| Die Size | Not listed | 154 mm² |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E-2246G is the superior performer in every benchmark recorded. It wins all five head-to-head tests, with deltas of -80.9% or -81% against the Atom in each case. For anyone needing multi-threaded throughput, the Xeon’s 6 cores and 12 threads deliver 11,720 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the Atom’s 2,244. The Xeon’s boost clock of 4.80 GHz also ensures single-core dominance, as seen in its 1,654 Cinebench R23 single-core score versus 316 for the Atom. If raw processing power is the sole criterion, the Xeon is the only logical pick.

However, the Atom x7213RE is not without purpose. Its 9W TDP makes it a candidate for passive cooling and battery-powered operation, where the Xeon’s 80W TDP would be prohibitive. The Atom’s support for DDR5 and its newer 10nm process also point to a more modern, power-efficient design. The data shows the Atom is not a competitor in performance, but it is a viable option for embedded or mobile workloads where the Xeon’s power draw is unacceptable. The Xeon, meanwhile, is end-of-life, meaning the Atom has a longer production runway for new designs. Choose the Xeon for performance-centric server or workstation builds; choose the Atom for low-power, thermally constrained applications where efficiency trumps speed.