Intel Atom x7809C vs Intel Core i5-8500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall victory for the Intel Core i5-8500, which wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. However, the margin of victory varies dramatically depending on the workload, and the Atom x7809C manages to take three notable wins of its own.

The most decisive i5-8500 triumph comes in the Passmark extended instructions test, where it scores 11,480 against the Atom's 5,509, a 108.4% advantage. This is the single largest percentage gap in the entire comparison, indicating a massive difference in workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets. The i5-8500 also dominates in Passmark single-thread performance, scoring 2,441 compared to the Atom's 1,462, a 67% lead. This directly reflects the core clock advantage: the i5-8500 boosts to 4.10 GHz while the Atom reaches only 3.60 GHz.

The Cinebench suite shows a much tighter contest. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-8500 scores 8,079 versus the Atom's 7,997, a mere 1% difference. The single-core R23 test is equally close, 1,140 versus 1,129, again a 1% gap. The R20 and R15 results follow the same pattern, with the i5-8500 winning by 1% or less in every Cinebench test. This tells you that, despite the Atom having two more cores (8 versus 6), the i5-8500's higher clock speeds and superior per-core architecture are just enough to keep it ahead in these rendering workloads.

The Atom x7809C claims its three wins in specific Passmark subtests. The most striking is data encryption, where the Atom scores 7,832 against the i5-8500's 3,027, a 61.4% advantage. This is a massive inversion of the overall trend. The Atom also wins in integer math, 28,946 versus 26,551, an 8.3% lead, and in physics, 686 versus 628, an 8.5% lead. These wins suggest the Atom's Gracemont cores have particular strengths in certain integer-heavy and physics-simulation workloads.

Beyond those three tests, the i5-8500's wins range from narrow to overwhelming. In data compression, the i5-8500 scores 134,673 against the Atom's 111,525, a 20.8% lead. Floating-point math goes to the i5-8500 by 25.9%, 22,489 versus 17,856. Find prime numbers shows a 24.1% gap, 36 versus 29. The multithread and random string sorting tests are closer, with the i5-8500 winning by 1.3% and 3.6% respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of two distinct personalities. The Intel Core i5-8500 is the general-purpose performer, winning the majority of tests and showing particular strength in single-threaded applications, extended instruction workloads, and floating-point math. Its 67% lead in single-thread Passmark makes it the obvious choice for everyday responsiveness, legacy software, and any task that relies heavily on one core. The 108.4% advantage in extended instructions means developers compiling code, running simulations, or using optimized libraries will see substantial gains on the i5-8500. For classic rendering workloads as measured by Cinebench, the i5-8500 also holds a slight but consistent edge across all versions of the test.

The Intel Atom x7809C wins in three specific areas. Its 61.4% lead in data encryption is the standout, making it the stronger option for encryption-heavy tasks like VPN throughput, disk encryption, or secure communication protocols. The 8.3% win in integer math suggests it handles certain types of calculations, possibly those with simpler instruction patterns, more efficiently. The 8.5% lead in the physics subtest indicates it may be better suited for certain simulation or game-physics calculations that rely on that specific workload. However, these three wins are isolated, and the Atom loses the remaining 14 tests.

For a practical builder, the choice is about workload profile. If the primary tasks are encryption, integer-heavy processing, or physics simulation, the Atom x7809C has a measurable advantage. For everything else, from office productivity to content creation to general multitasking, the i5-8500 is the safer bet.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-8500 scores 8,079 versus the Intel Atom x7809C's 7,997, giving the i5-8500 a 1% lead in this test.

Q: How much faster is the i5-8500 in single-threaded Passmark performance?

A: The i5-8500 scores 2,441 while the Atom x7809C scores 1,462, making the i5-8500 67% faster in this specific benchmark.

Q: Is there any test where the Atom x7809C beats the i5-8500 by a large margin?

A: Yes, in the Passmark data encryption test, the Atom x7809C scores 7,832 versus the i5-8500's 3,027, a 61.4% advantage for the Atom.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The i5-8500 has an average benchmark score of 13,142, while the Atom x7809C averages 12,607, a difference of roughly 4.2% in favor of the i5-8500.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Atom x7809C has 8 cores, while the Intel Core i5-8500 has 6 cores. Both have the same number of threads as cores.

Q: How do their Cinebench R20 multi-core scores compare?

A: The i5-8500 scores 3,393 and the Atom x7809C scores 3,358, a 1% difference in favor of the i5-8500.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Intel Core i5-8500 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Atom x7809C has 8 cores and 8 threads. The i5-8500 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, whereas the Atom x7809C runs at a 2.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost.

Power consumption differs significantly: the i5-8500 has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Atom x7809C is rated at just 25 watts. The socket types are incompatible, with the i5-8500 using Intel Socket 1151 and the Atom x7809C using Intel BGA 1264. The i5-8500 is a desktop part, while the Atom x7809C is classified as mobile.

Memory support also diverges. The i5-8500 supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Atom x7809C supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but uses a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i5-8500 has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the Atom x7809C has only 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The i5-8500 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the Atom x7809C has no integrated graphics at all.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap between these two processors is significant. The Intel Core i5-8500 is built on Intel's Coffee Lake architecture, using a 14 nm process node with a die size of 154 mm². The Intel Atom x7809C uses the Amston Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process node. The i5-8500 is part of the Core i5 (Coffee Lake) generation, while the Atom x7809C belongs to the Atom (Gracemont) generation.

Cache layouts are fundamentally different. The i5-8500 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The Atom x7809C has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This reflects the different design philosophies: the i5-8500 uses larger per-core L2 caches, while the Atom uses a module-based L2 arrangement.

The production status also differs. The i5-8500 is marked as end-of-life, while the Atom x7809C is currently active. The i5-8500 was released in early 2018, while the Atom x7809C was released in early 2024. The i5-8500's launch MSRP was $192, and the Atom x7809C's launch MSRP was $117. Both have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a straightforward recommendation for most users: the Intel Core i5-8500 is the stronger all-around processor. It wins 14 of 17 tests, including every Cinebench test and the single-thread Passmark test by a massive 67%. Its average benchmark score of 13,142 puts it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, while the Atom x7809C's 12,607 lands in the 67th percentile. The i5-8500's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-7700K, which it trails by just 1.1%, and the Intel Core i7-10750H, which it beats by 0.9%.

The Atom x7809C is not without merit. Its 61.4% lead in data encryption is a compelling reason to choose it for security-focused workloads. Its wins in integer math and physics show it can handle specific computational tasks very well. The 25-watt TDP also makes it an energy-efficient option for embedded or mobile applications where power draw is a primary concern.

However, the i5-8500's dominance in single-thread performance and extended instructions makes it the better choice for general desktop use, software development, and content creation. The fact that it wins Cinebench R23 multi-core despite having fewer cores and a significantly older architecture is telling. For most builders looking for a capable desktop processor, the data points to the i5-8500. The Atom x7809C is a specialized part, best suited for workloads that match its specific strengths in encryption and integer-heavy processing.