Intel Atom x7835RE vs Intel Xeon Gold 6330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for these two processors shows a complete sweep in favor of the Intel Xeon Gold 6330 across all six shared benchmark tests. There are no tests where the Intel Atom x7835RE comes out ahead, and the margin of victory for the Xeon is remarkably consistent, hovering around 80% in every single category.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Atom x7835RE scores 609 while the Xeon Gold 6330 scores 3115. That is a difference of roughly 80.4%, meaning the Xeon delivers more than five times the multicore rendering throughput. The single-core test in R15 tells a similar story: the Atom manages 85 points, while the Xeon reaches 439, again an 80.6% gap. The consistency of these margins is striking, suggesting the performance difference is structural rather than workload-specific.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The Atom scores 2541 in multicore, while the Xeon scores 12980, a delta of 80.4%. Single-core R20 results show the Atom at 358 and the Xeon at 1832, an 80.5% difference. The Atom's single-core scores across all three Cinebench versions are low in absolute terms, but the relative gap to the Xeon remains almost identical regardless of the benchmark version.

Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the three rendering tests, continues the trend. The Atom x7835RE produces 6051 in multicore, while the Xeon Gold 6330 produces 30906, again an 80.4% gap. In single-core R23, the Atom scores 854 and the Xeon scores 4363, an 80.4% difference. Every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison returns a delta between 80.4% and 80.6%, meaning the Xeon's advantage is essentially uniform across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

The database also contains additional benchmark data for the Atom that is not present for the Xeon. The Atom achieves 76736 in Passmark data compression, 5579 in data encryption, 3617 in extended instructions, 23 in find prime numbers, 16236 in floating point math, 26623 in integer math, 7119 in multithread, 500 in physics, 10180 in random string sorting, and 1599 in single thread. These numbers cannot be directly compared to the Xeon since no corresponding figures exist in the recorded data for the Xeon, but they provide context for the Atom's overall profile.

The average benchmark score for the Atom is 9430, while the Xeon's average is 8939. This is an interesting anomaly: the Xeon wins every shared test by a massive margin, yet the Atom has a higher average score across all recorded benchmarks. This is explained by the fact that the Atom has many more recorded benchmark entries, including several Passmark tests where it scores well above its Cinebench results. The Xeon has only six recorded benchmarks, all Cinebench tests, which pull its average down relative to the Atom's broader dataset.

Both processors sit at the 65th percentile among all CPUs in the database. This is a notable result, as it means the Atom, despite its much lower raw scores in the shared tests, is ranked in the same percentile tier as the Xeon. The percentile calculation appears to factor in the full benchmark suite available for each processor, not just the head-to-head tests.

The nearest rivals for the Atom in the database include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 with an average score of 9406 and a delta of 0.3%, the Intel Core i7-7700HQ at 9493 with a delta of -0.7%, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX at 9348 with a delta of 0.9%, and the AMD EPYC 7402P at 9529 with a delta of -1%. The nearest rivals for the Xeon Gold 6330 include the Intel Core i7-8650U at 8932 with a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Core i5-8350U at 8998 with a delta of -0.7%, the Intel Core i5-1135G7 at 9053 with a delta of -1.3%, and the Intel Xeon Gold 6346 at 9155 with a delta of -2.4%.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear division of roles. The Intel Xeon Gold 6330 is the superior processor in every measurable head-to-head test, with an advantage of roughly 80% across all six Cinebench benchmarks. For anyone whose priority is raw rendering performance, multi-threaded throughput, or single-thread responsiveness, the Xeon is the only choice supported by the recorded numbers.

The Intel Atom x7835RE, however, is not without its own merits. Its average benchmark score of 9430 actually exceeds the Xeon's average of 8939, and it sits at the same 65th percentile among all CPUs. The Atom also has a much broader recorded benchmark profile, with strong showings in data compression at 76736 and integer math at 26623, suggesting it handles specific tasks reasonably well despite its poor Cinebench results.

The Xeon's specifications point to a server and workstation processor with 28 cores and 56 threads, while the Atom offers 8 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon supports ECC memory, has an eight-channel memory bus, and provides 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The Atom lacks ECC support, uses a single-channel memory bus, and provides only 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The Xeon also has a much larger 42 MB shared L3 cache compared to the Atom's 6 MB shared L3 cache.

The power envelope differs dramatically. The Xeon has a thermal design power of 205, while the Atom draws just 12. For systems where power consumption and heat dissipation are critical constraints, the Atom is the clear winner on paper, though the benchmark data does not include any efficiency measurements.

The market segmentation is also telling. The Atom is classified as a mobile processor, while the Xeon is classified as a server and workstation processor. These are different tools for different jobs, and the benchmark results reflect that positioning.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Atom x7835RE is built on the Amston Lake architecture, using Gracemont cores. The Intel Xeon Gold 6330 uses the Ice Lake architecture, specifically Ice Lake-SP. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel, but the core designs are fundamentally different. The Atom uses efficient Gracemont cores, which prioritize power efficiency over raw performance, while the Xeon uses high-performance Ice Lake server cores.

The Atom has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. The Xeon has 28 cores and 56 threads, with hyper-threading enabled. This explains the massive multicore performance gap in the benchmark results. The Xeon's 28 cores and 56 threads simply overwhelm the Atom's 8 cores and 8 threads in threaded workloads.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Atom provides 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a much larger 42 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger L3 cache is typical for server processors, where data locality and large working sets are common.

Memory support shows a significant divergence. The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, but only with a single-channel memory bus, delivering 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon supports DDR4 only, but with an eight-channel memory bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon's memory bandwidth is more than five times higher, which matters for memory-intensive server workloads.

ECC memory support is another key difference. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the Atom does not. This is a critical feature for server and workstation deployments where data integrity is paramount.

PCIe capabilities also separate the two. The Atom provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Xeon provides Gen 4 with 64 lanes. The Xeon offers both a newer PCIe generation and far more lanes, enabling more expansion cards, GPUs, and NVMe storage devices.

The Atom includes integrated UHD Graphics with 32 execution units, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. For systems that require a display output without a discrete GPU, the Atom has an advantage.

The socket types are different as well. The Atom uses Intel BGA 1264, a soldered mobile socket, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 4189, a server socket designed for replaceable processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Atom x7835RE has an average benchmark score of 9430, while the Intel Xeon Gold 6330 has an average score of 8939.

Q: Does the Atom support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Atom x7835RE does not support ECC memory. The Intel Xeon Gold 6330 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Atom provides 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth with a single-channel memory bus. The Xeon provides 204.8 GB/s with an eight-channel memory bus.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6330 has 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The Intel Atom x7835RE has 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Q: What is the core and thread count for each processor?

A: The Atom has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Xeon has 28 cores and 56 threads.

Q: Does the Atom have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Atom includes UHD Graphics with 32 execution units. The Xeon has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 6330 wins in every benchmark category where both processors have recorded scores. The six Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multicore performance across R15, R20, and R23 versions, all show the Xeon ahead by roughly 80%. For rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, and any workload that scales across many cores, the Xeon's 28 cores and 56 threads provide a decisive advantage. Its 42 MB of L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth further support large, data-intensive workloads.

The Intel Atom x7835RE wins in scenarios defined by its physical characteristics rather than its benchmark scores. With a thermal design power of just 12, it is suited for fanless or passively cooled mobile devices. Its integrated UHD Graphics with 32 execution units means no discrete GPU is required for basic display output. The Atom also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility in memory selection. Its BGA 1264 socket is designed for embedded and mobile applications where the processor is soldered directly to the motherboard.

The Atom's Passmark scores, while not directly comparable to the Xeon due to missing Xeon data, show reasonable performance in specific tasks. Data compression at 76736, integer math at 26623, and random string sorting at 10180 indicate the Atom can handle certain computational tasks without excessive slowdown. The Atom's single-thread Passmark score of 1599 suggests decent per-core efficiency for a low-power processor.

The Xeon's market segment is explicitly server and workstation, while the Atom's is mobile. The Xeon targets data centers, enterprise servers, and professional workstations. The Atom targets embedded systems, edge devices, and mobile computing platforms. The benchmark data supports this distinction: the Xeon dominates in raw performance, while the Atom offers extreme power efficiency and integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The core count differs significantly: the Atom has 8 cores, while the Xeon has 28 cores. Thread counts differ as well, with the Atom at 8 threads and the Xeon at 56 threads.

Base clock speeds vary, with the Atom running at 1.30 GHz and the Xeon at 2000.00 MHz. Boost clocks show a reversal: the Atom boosts to 3.60 GHz, while the Xeon boosts to 3.10 GHz. The Atom actually has a higher boost clock, but this does not translate into better single-core performance in the benchmark results.

Thermal design power is vastly different: the Atom is rated at 12, while the Xeon is rated at 205.

The sockets are different: the Atom uses Intel BGA 1264, and the Xeon uses Intel Socket 4189.

The architectures differ: the Atom uses Amston Lake with Gracemont cores, and the Xeon uses Ice Lake-SP.

Cache configurations are different. The Atom has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per module, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 42 MB of shared L3.

Memory support differs: the Atom supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus, while the Xeon supports DDR4 with an eight-channel bus. Memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s for the Atom and 204.8 GB/s for the Xeon.

ECC memory support is absent on the Atom and present on the Xeon.

PCIe capabilities differ: the Atom has Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Xeon has Gen 4 with 64 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on the Atom as UHD Graphics 32EU, while the Xeon has none.

Market segments differ: the Atom is mobile, and the Xeon is server or workstation.

Release dates differ: the Atom was released in 2024-04-07, and the Xeon was released in 2021-04-05.

The Atom has a launch MSRP of $127, while the Xeon has no recorded launch MSRP.

Part numbers are different: the Atom is SRNER, and the Xeon is SRKHMCD8068904572101.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process.

The Atom has 0 wins in the head-to-head comparison, while the Xeon has 6 wins.