OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
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 C3308 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£55PassMark multi-core score:?N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:2.1 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1310TDP (Thermal design power):9.5 W

Intel Atom C3308 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
▲ Better than 50% of models
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
▲ Better than 71% of models
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
▲ Better than 50% of models
Score components

60%

5.8

Performance

18%

5.2

Architecture

10%

5.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.0

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~ £55
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Atom C3308

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
▲ Better than 50% of models
Score components:

60%

5.8

Performance

18%

5.2

Architecture

10%

5.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.0

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
▲ Better than 71% of models
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.
CPU socket
FCBGA1310
This processor uses the FCBGA1310 CPU socket, which is older than that of 92.4% of processors and equal to that of 1% 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, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 76.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
2
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 80.4% of processors and equal to 19.6% of processors.
CPU threads
2
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 2 CPU threads, which is fewer than 94.3% of processors and equal to 5.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
2.1 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 2.1 GHz which is lower than that of 99.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.6 GHz which is lower than that of 96.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
?
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
0 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 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
4 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
112 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 112 KB which is smaller than that of 98.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
1,866 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,866 MHz, which is lower than that of 84.9% of processors and equal to 2.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-1866 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-1866 MHz, which is lower than that of 85.9% of processors and equal to 0.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% 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)
9.5 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 9.5 W which is lower than that of 95.7% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
9.5 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 9.5 W which is lower than that of 95.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Atom C3308 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 78.9% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9.5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9.5 W vs 45 W
  • 11 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (89 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    89 °C vs 100 °C
  • 78.9% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9.5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9.5 W vs 45 W
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Denverton vs Kaby Lake).
    Denverton vs Kaby Lake
  • 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
  • 4.55x cheaper
    Intel Atom C3308 is cheaper than the average processor (£55 vs £250).
    £55 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).
    server vs mobile
  • 4x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Denverton vs Kaby Lake).
    Denverton vs Kaby Lake
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 78.9% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9.5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9.5 W vs 45 W
  • 11 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (89 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    89 °C vs 100 °C
  • 78.9% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9.5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9.5 W vs 45 W
  • 52.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (2.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    2.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 6 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (2 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    2 vs 8
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, 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, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 2 fewer performance cores
    This processor has fewer performance cores than the average processor (2 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    2 vs 4
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, 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, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1310 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1310 vs FP5
  • 3 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2017 vs 2020).
    2017 vs 2020
  • 52.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (2.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    2.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 6 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (2 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    2 vs 8
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 fewer performance cores
    This processor has fewer performance cores than the average processor (2 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    2 vs 4
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 12 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (16 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    16 vs 28
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 70.8% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (112 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    112 KB vs 384 KB
  • 41.7% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,866 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    1,866 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 10 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (6 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    6 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 (DDR4-1866 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-1,866 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 1 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    1 vs 2
  • 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 C3308

  • Extremely low power consumption (9.5W TDP) making it ideal for 24/7 operation
  • Supports ECC memory, which is essential for server and networking stability
  • Passively coolable in many configurations due to low heat generation
  • Good value for low-workload headless server tasks like NAS or basic firewalls
  • Includes Intel QuickAssist Technology (QAT) for hardware-accelerated encryption and compression
  • Supports a surprisingly high maximum RAM capacity of up to 128GB

What customers don't like about Intel Atom C3308

  • Very limited dual-core performance; struggles with heavy multitasking or modern web browsing
  • Lacks integrated graphics, requiring a separate GPU or headless setup
  • Poor performance in floating-point math compared to desktop-class processors
  • Single-channel memory support limits overall data throughput
  • Vulnerable to certain side-channel security attacks common in older Intel architectures
  • Potential for thermal-related resets if operating in poorly ventilated enclosures exceeding 100°C

Verdict

The Intel Atom C3308 is a dual-core server-grade processor from the Denverton family, built on a 14nm lithography and designed primarily for low-power communications and embedded applications. It operates at a base frequency of 1.60 GHz with a turbo boost up to 2.10 GHz, featuring a 4MB L2 cache and a remarkably low Thermal Design Power (TDP) of just 9.5W. Key advantages include support for up to 128GB of DDR4-1866 ECC memory, integrated Intel QuickAssist Technology (QAT) for hardware acceleration, and a wide operating temperature range from -40°C to 89°C. However, its primary drawbacks are its limited performance with only two cores and two threads, the absence of integrated graphics, and a relatively slow memory speed compared to modern desktop standards.

Compare Intel Atom C3308 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 C3308 and other processors

No results found