Atom C3758 vs FX-6350

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Atom C3758

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 25W instead of 125W, a 100W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6350 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,614 vs 4,640).

FX-6350

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $132 MSRP, while Atom C3758 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌400% higher power demand at 125W vs 25W.

Atom C3758

2017

FX-6350

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 25W instead of 125W, a 100W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6350 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,614 vs 4,640).

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $132 MSRP, while Atom C3758 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌400% higher power demand at 125W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-6350 better than Atom C3758?

Yes. FX-6350 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 10.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-6350 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 10.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-6350 is the better fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 6 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

FX-6350 is the smarter buy today. FX-6350 is at an unclear MSRP at $132 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 10.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (35.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Atom C3758 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Atom C3758 Benchmark Check

FX-6350 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Atom C3758	FX-6350
1080p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	108 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	108 FPS	116 FPS
high	86 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	68 FPS	79 FPS
4K
low	65 FPS	65 FPS
medium	55 FPS	58 FPS
high	43 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	34 FPS	36 FPS

Open Atom C3758 Open FX-6350

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Atom C3758	FX-6350
1080p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	113 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	116 FPS
1440p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	112 FPS	116 FPS
high	101 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	116 FPS
4K
low	89 FPS	116 FPS
medium	82 FPS	116 FPS
high	73 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	57 FPS	116 FPS

Open Atom C3758 Open FX-6350

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Atom C3758	FX-6350
1080p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS
1440p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS
4K
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS

Open Atom C3758 Open FX-6350

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Atom C3758	FX-6350
1080p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS
1440p
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS
4K
low	115 FPS	116 FPS
medium	115 FPS	116 FPS
high	115 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	116 FPS

Open Atom C3758 Open FX-6350

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Atom C3758 and FX-6350

Atom C3758

The Atom C3758 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 2400. Passmark benchmark score: 4,614 points. Launch price was $193.

FX-6350

The FX-6350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L2 cache: 6144 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,640 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom C3758 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the FX-6350 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the Atom C3758 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Atom C3758 versus 4.2 GHz on the FX-6350 — a 62.5% clock advantage for the FX-6350 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The Atom C3758 uses the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-6350 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Atom C3758 scores 4,614 against the FX-6350's 4,640 — a 0.6% lead for the FX-6350.

Feature	Atom C3758	FX-6350
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+33%	6 / 6
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	4.2 GHz+91%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	3.9 GHz+77%
L3 Cache	16 MB	—
L2 Cache	16 MB+167%	6144 kB
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Goldmont (2016−2017)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	4,614	4,640
Geekbench 6 Single	400	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	2,400	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom C3758 uses the FCBGA1310 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-6350 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Atom C3758	FX-6350
Socket	FCBGA1310	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—