CPU Comparison

The Intel Atom x7809C and Intel Core i3-10105 are both active Intel processors, but they target entirely different segments. The data shows a decisive split: the Atom x7809C wins 11 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Core i3-10105 wins 6. The Atom’s victories are often lopsided, such as a 187.6% lead in data encryption and a 46.9% lead in physics, whereas the Core i3’s wins are narrower or concentrated in specific workloads like single-threaded tasks. For users prioritizing multi-threaded throughput, encryption, or physics simulations, the Atom x7809C is the clear choice from the data. For those needing legacy software compatibility, higher single-thread scores, or a desktop platform with integrated graphics, the Core i3-10105 holds the edge. Neither chip dominates universally, so the pick depends on workload rather than overall superiority.

The Verdict

The benchmark data verdict is unambiguous: the Intel Atom x7809C is the superior multi-threaded processor, while the Intel Core i3-10105 wins on single-thread responsiveness and specific instruction-heavy tasks. The Atom leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 13.8% (7997 vs 7029) and in PassMark multithread by 14.2% (9409 vs 8241). It also crushes the Core i3 in data encryption by 187.6% (7832 vs 2723) and in find prime numbers by 45% (29 vs 20). However, the Core i3-10105 delivers a 43.5% higher PassMark single-thread score (2589 vs 1462) and a 36.3% lead in extended instructions (8648 vs 5509). The Atom’s 67th percentile ranking ties with the Core i3’s 67th percentile, placing both in the same overall performance class despite their divergent strengths. Choose the Atom for parallel workloads and power efficiency; choose the Core i3 for single-threaded applications and desktop versatility.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Atom x7809C uses the Amston Lake architecture, codename Amston Lake, with a generation labeled Atom (Gracemont). It is manufactured on a 10 nm process node by Intel. In contrast, the Intel Core i3-10105 uses the Comet Lake architecture, codename Comet Lake-R, with a generation labeled Core i3 (Comet Lake), built on a 14 nm process node. The Atom features 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3 has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning the Atom relies on physical cores while the Core i3 uses hyper-threading. Cache layouts differ sharply: the Atom provides 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3; the Core i3 offers 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support diverges as well, the Atom supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i3 supports only DDR4 but with a dual-channel bus and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Atom has no integrated graphics (N/A), whereas the Core i3 includes UHD Graphics 630. PCIe lanes also differ: the Atom provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Core i3 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Atom is a mobile segment part on Intel BGA 1264 socket; the Core i3 is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1200.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Atom x7809C wins every Cinebench test, with deltas ranging from 13.7% to 14.1%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Atom scores 805 against 708 (13.7% lead), and in single-core it leads 113 vs 99 (14.1%). Cinebench R20 shows similar margins: 3358 vs 2952 (13.8%) multi-core and 474 vs 416 (13.9%) single-core. Cinebench R23 multi-core results are 7997 vs 7029 (13.8%), and single-core is 1129 vs 992 (13.8%). These consistent double-digit wins indicate the Atom’s architecture provides a broad multi-threaded advantage despite its lower clock speeds.

The Core i3-10105 fights back in PassMark tests. Its biggest win is in single-thread performance, scoring 2589 vs 1462 (43.5% higher). It also leads in data compression by 13.2% (128464 vs 111525) and in extended instructions by 36.3% (8648 vs 5509). In floating-point math, the Core i3 edges out the Atom by 0.5% (17949 vs 17856), and in random string sorting by 1.1% (15899 vs 15728). These wins suggest the Core i3 excels at branch-heavy, latency-sensitive tasks and compression workloads.

The Atom counters with its own PassMark triumphs. Beyond the encryption and prime number blowouts, it wins integer math by 1.3% (28946 vs 28577), physics by 46.9% (686 vs 467), and multithread by 14.2% (9409 vs 8241). The physics delta is particularly striking, a 46.9% margin that highlights the Atom’s ability to handle simulation-style workloads. Overall, the Atom wins 11 benchmarks, the Core i3 wins 6, but the magnitude of the Core i3’s single-thread loss is its most severe weakness.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Atom x7809C is faster in all Cinebench multi-core tests, leading by 13.7% in R15 (805 vs 708), 13.8% in R20 (3358 vs 2952), and 13.8% in R23 (7997 vs 7029). It also leads PassMark multithread by 14.2% (9409 vs 8241).

Q: Does the Core i3-10105 have any clear advantages?

A: Yes, the Core i3-10105 wins single-thread performance by 43.5% (2589 vs 1462) in PassMark, and also leads in data compression by 13.2% (128464 vs 111525) and extended instructions by 36.3% (8648 vs 5509).

Q: Which chip is better for encryption tasks?

A: The Atom x7809C dominates encryption, scoring 7832 in PassMark data encryption versus 2723 for the Core i3-10105, a 187.6% advantage. This is the largest delta between the two processors.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core i3-10105 has higher memory bandwidth at 42.7 GB/s with dual-channel DDR4 support, while the Atom x7809C provides 38.4 GB/s with single-channel DDR4/DDR5 support. The Core i3’s bandwidth advantage is 11.2% higher.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Atom x7809C has N/A for integrated graphics, while the Core i3-10105 includes UHD Graphics 630. This makes the Core i3 suitable for systems without a discrete GPU.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Atom x7809C has an average benchmark score of 12607, while the Core i3-10105 averages 12316. The Atom leads by 2.4%, and both sit at the 67th percentile among all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Atom x7809C wins decisively in multi-threaded throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 7997 versus 7029 for the Core i3-10105 demonstrates a 13.8% advantage that will favor video rendering, 3D modeling, and any parallel compilation workload. The physics benchmark is another clear win, 686 vs 467 (46.9% higher), making the Atom better suited for simulation tasks and physics-based applications. Encryption is the Atom’s most extreme strength, at 187.6% higher (7832 vs 2723), recommending it for security-related workloads or data protection tasks. It also wins integer math by 1.3% (28946 vs 28577) and find prime numbers by 45% (29 vs 20), indicating solid general arithmetic performance. The Atom’s 11 benchmark wins out of 17 overall mark it as the more versatile performer in the data.

The Intel Core i3-10105 wins in areas requiring high single-thread speed. Its PassMark single-thread score of 2589 versus 1462 for the Atom is a 43.5% gap, which matters for legacy software, lightly threaded games, or applications with strict single-core dependencies. Data compression is another strength, with 128464 vs 111525 (13.2% higher), making it better for archiving and file compression tasks. Extended instructions show a 36.3% lead (8648 vs 5509), suggesting the Core i3 handles SIMD and advanced instruction sets more efficiently. Floating-point math is nearly tied, but the Core i3 wins by 0.5% (17949 vs 17856), and random string sorting by 1.1% (15899 vs 15728), indicating a slight edge in text processing and sorting algorithms. The Core i3 also offers integrated graphics and a dual-channel memory bus, which the data shows provides higher bandwidth (42.7 GB/s vs 38.4 GB/s).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Atom x7809C has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i3-10105 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clock speeds differ significantly: the Atom runs at 2.00 GHz, while the Core i3 runs at 3.70 GHz. Boost clocks are 3.60 GHz for the Atom and 4.40 GHz for the Core i3. Thermal design power is a major split, the Atom is rated at 25 W TDP, whereas the Core i3 is rated at 65 W TDP. Process nodes differ (10 nm for Atom vs 14 nm for Core i3). Cache structures diverge: the Atom has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3; the Core i3 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4/DDR5 for the Atom versus DDR4-only for the Core i3, with bus widths of single-channel and dual-channel respectively. Memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s for the Atom and 42.7 GB/s for the Core i3. PCIe lanes are 9 for the Atom and 16 for the Core i3, both Gen 3. Integrated graphics are N/A on the Atom versus UHD Graphics 630 on the Core i3. Market segments differ (Mobile vs Desktop), sockets differ (Intel BGA 1264 vs Intel Socket 1200), and release dates differ (2024-04-07 vs 2021-03-15). The Atom’s launch MSRP is $117, while the Core i3’s is $122. Both have locked multipliers and no ECC memory support, and neither has a v-cache option.