Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Atom C2516 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£60PassMark multi-core score:?N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:N/A GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1283TDP (Thermal design power):10 W

Intel Atom C2516 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

5.8

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▲Better than 50% of processors
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

▲Better than 71%
5.8

Technical score

Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

60%

6.1

Performance

18%

5.0

Architecture

10%

3.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

6.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 50%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £60
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Atom C2516

Technical score
Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

60%

6.1

Performance

18%

5.0

Architecture

10%

3.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

6.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

5.8
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.7
Processor type
server
This processor belongs to the server processor class, which is more advanced than that of 94.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.1% of processors.
networking
CPU socket
FCBGA1283
This processor uses the FCBGA1283 CPU socket, which is older than that of 93.6% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 73% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
?
CPU boost clock speed
N/A
CPU base clock speed
4x 1.4 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x1.4 GHz which is lower than that of 86.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
?
Show more
Semiconductor size
22 nm
This processor uses a 22 nm process node, which is older than that of 85% of processors and equal to that of 9.6% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 22 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 22 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 84.9% of processors and equal to that of 9.8% of processors.
L3 cache
0 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 0 MB which is smaller than that of 93.9% of processors and equal to that of 6.1% of processors.
L2 cache
2 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 2 MB which is smaller than that of 52.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
L1 cache
224 KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 224 KB which is smaller than that of 78.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR3
This processor supports DDR DDR3, which is older than that of 86.7% of processors and equal to that of 13.3% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
1,333 MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,333 MHz, which is lower than that of 98.6% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR3-1333 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR3-1333 MHz, which is lower than that of 98.5% of processors and equal to 1.3% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
32 GB
This processor supports up to 32 GB of memory, which is less than 73% of processors and equal to 18.9% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
10 W
This processor has a TDP of 10 W which is lower than that of 94.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
10 W
This processor has a base power of 10 W which is lower than that of 94.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Atom C2516 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 77.8% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (10 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    10 W vs 45 W
  • 77.8% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (10 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    10 W vs 45 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (server vs mobile).
    networking
    server vs mobile
  • 4.17x cheaper
    Intel Atom C2516 is cheaper than the average processor (£60 vs £250).
    £60 vs £250
  • 4.17x cheaper
    Intel Atom C2516 is cheaper than the average processor (£60 vs £250).
    £60 vs £250
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (server vs mobile).
    networking
    server vs mobile
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 77.8% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (10 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    10 W vs 45 W
  • 77.8% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (10 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    10 W vs 45 W
  • 73.8% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (669 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    669 vs 2,558
  • 83.3% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    22 nm vs 12 nm
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (4x1.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x1.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 58.3% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,333 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    1,333 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1283 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1283 vs FP5
  • 3 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    2017 vs 2020
  • 73.8% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (669 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    669 vs 2,558
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (4x1.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x1.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 14 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (14 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    14 vs 28
  • 83.3% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    22 nm vs 12 nm
  • 41.7% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (224 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    224 KB vs 384 KB
  • 33.3% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (2 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    2 MB vs 3 MB
  • Less advanced foundry
    This processor uses a less advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 58.3% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,333 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    1,333 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Older DDR support
    This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3 vs DDR4).
    DDR3 vs DDR4
  • 8 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (8 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    8 vs 16
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR3-1333 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR3-1,333 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Older PCIe version
    This processor supports an older PCIe version than the average processor (2 vs 3).
    2.0 vs 3.0
  • 50% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Atom C2516

  • Extremely low power consumption with a 10W TDP, ideal for 24/7 low-energy operation
  • Supports Error-Correcting Code (ECC) memory, making it suitable for stable server and NAS environments
  • Four physical cores provide decent multitasking for lightweight, headless server tasks compared to dual-core Atom models
  • High maximum operating temperature (100°C) allows for reliable use in fanless or embedded designs
  • Includes Intel QuickAssist Technology (QAT) to accelerate cryptographic and compression workloads

What customers don't like about Intel Atom C2516

  • Low base clock speed of 1.40 GHz leads to sluggish performance in desktop environments
  • Lack of Integrated Graphics (iGPU) requires a separate GPU or headless setup
  • No Turbo Boost or Hyper-Threading technology, limiting performance under heavy single-threaded bursts
  • Supports older DDR3 memory (max 1333 MHz), which is significantly slower than modern DDR4/DDR5 standards
  • Restricted to PCI Express 2.0, bottlenecking modern high-speed NVMe storage and networking cards

Verdict

The Intel Atom C2516 is an embedded quad-core processor from the Rangeley family, built on a 22nm lithography process with a base frequency of 1.40 GHz and a 2 MB L2 cache. Its primary strengths include an exceptionally low 10W TDP for high energy efficiency, support for up to 32 GB of ECC memory to prevent data corruption, and integrated Intel QuickAssist Technology for hardware-accelerated security and compression. However, it is limited by its lack of Turbo Boost or Hyper-Threading, the absence of integrated graphics, and a relatively slow 1333 MHz DDR3 memory support, making it unsuitable for general-purpose computing or media-heavy tasks.

Compare Intel Atom C2516 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Atom C2516 and other processors

No results found