The new Atom core is surprisingly capable


Limp Gawd
Jul 2, 2016
Pentium J4205 results provided by AnandTech user Brunnis, comparisons by me. Hope it's useful!

Goldmont vs Airmont vs Jaguar/Puma+ vs Core 2 Quad

Pentium J4205 - 4C/4T Goldmont @ 1.5GHz (base) / 2.6 GHz (turbo)
Pentium N3710 - 4C/4C Airmont @ 1.6 GHz (base) / 2.56 GHz (turbo)*
Pentium J2900 - 4C/4C Silvermont @ 2.41 GHz (base) / 2.66 GHz (turbo)
Core 2 Quad Q6600 - 4C/4T 'Kentsfield' @ 2.4 GHz
A8-7410 - 4C/4T Puma+ @ 2.2 GHz (base) / 2.5 GHz (turbo)*
A6-5200 - 4C/4T Jaguar @ 2.0 GHz (no turbo)
Athlon 5350 - 4C/4T Jaguar @ 2.05 GHz (no turbo)
FX-4100 - 2M/4C Bulldozer @ 3.6 GHz (base) / 3.8 GHz (turbo)
FX-4300 - 2C/4C Piledriver @ 3.8 GHz (base) / 4.0 GHz (turbo)

*Picked the highest scores I could find for each @ NotebookCheck / Geekbench results are the highest Windows 64-bit scores

Cinebench 11.5 (64-bit)
Pentium J4205:
ST: 0.68
MT: 2.47
OpenGL: 12.78 FPS

This MT score basically matches a Core i5-4200U (Haswell-U) and the Haswell-based desktop Celeron/Pentium! ST is on par with Core 2 Quad Q6600, and 36-48% faster than a similarly clocked Pentium N3700/N3710.

*Pentium N3710:
ST: 0.5
MT: 1.89

ST: 0.62
MT: 2.16

Core 2 Quad Q6600:
ST: 0.69
MT: 2.7

FX-8800P @ 15W (Dual-Channel)
ST: 0.88
MT: 2.53

*Highest score from NotebookCheck



I will take my time on Cinebench 11.5 IPC comparisons below (spoiler tag):

Assuming 3.8 GHz for FX-4100 and 2.6 GHz for Pentium J4205 @ ST subtest - Goldmont would score around 1.0 at 3.8 GHz. This would put it:

- Ahead of the original Bulldozer in perf/clock
- On par with Piledriver (1.04 @ 4 GHz)
- Slightly behind Phenom II (1.11 @ 3.7 GHz)






Cinebench R15
- ST:
Pentium J4205: 52
A8-7410: 52
Pentium N3710: 42

- MT:
Pentium J4205: 193
A8-7410: 174
Pentium N3710: 150
Core 2 Quad Q6600: 234

Dolphin Benchmark
Pentium J4205: 25.76 min



Pentium J4205:
CPU Mark: 2460
ST: 915

CPU Mark: 2620
ST: 918

Pentium N3710:
CPU Mark: 1839
ST: 552

x264 Benchmark 5.0.1
Pentium J4205:
Pass 1: 21.45
Pass 2: 5.39

Core 2 Quad Q6600:
Pass 1: 23.8
Pass 2: 5.7

Geekbench v3
Pentium J4205:
ST: 1715
MT: 5588

A8-7410 (highest score):
ST: 1379
MT: 4042

Pentium N3710 (highest score):
ST: 1077
MT: 3540

Core 2 Quad Q6600:
ST: 1306
MT: 4490

Geekbench v4
Pentium J4205:
ST: 1643
MT: 4679

A8-7410 (highest score):
ST: 1360
MT: 3643

Pentium N3710 (highest score):
ST: 1207
MT: 3405

Core 2 Quad Q6600:
ST: 1543
MT: 4387

7-zip Benchmark
Pentium J4205: 1968 / 7410 MIPS



3DMark Firestrike v1.1
Pentium J4205:
Total: 603
Graphics: 648

*Pentium N3700:
Total: 256
Graphics: 270

Total: 522
Graphics: 560

*Highest scores from NotebookCheck

GFXBench 4.0.13
Pentium J4205:
Car Chase Offscreen: 14.8 FPS
1440p Manhattan 3.1.1 Offscreen: 13.7 FPS
1080p Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen: 23.7 FPS
1080p Manhattan Offscreen: 33.4 FPS
1080p T-Rex Offscreen: 67.5 FPS
1080p Texturing Offscreen: 5724 MTexels/s
1080p Driver Overhead 2 Offscreen: 35.9 FPS
1080p ALU 2 Offscreen: 61.5 FPS
Tessellation Offscreen: 51.8 FPS

Pentium N3710:
Car Chase Offscreen: 9.9 FPS
1440p Manhattan 3.1.1 Offscreen: 8.7 FPS
1080p Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen: 15.3 FPS
1080p Manhattan Offscreen: 20.3 FPS
1080p T-Rex Offscreen: 41.3 FPS

Comparison to Pentium N3710

Car Chase Offscreen: 11.1 FPS
1440p Manhattan 3.1.1 Offscreen: 6.8 FPS
1080p Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen: 10.5 FPS
1080p Manhattan Offscreen: 13.1 FPS
1080p T-Rex Offscreen: 46.9 FPS

Car Chase Offscreen: 15.6 FPS
1440p Manhattan 3.1.1 Offscreen: 12.1 FPS
1080p Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen: 18.4 FPS
1080p Manhattan Offscreen: 20.7 FPS
1080p T-Rex Offscreen: 70.6 FPS

*Top GFXBench scores for this part

Apollo Lake is basically 2.4x as fast as Braswell in Fire Strike Graphics, that's impressive. Relative to AMD it's faster than Carrizo-L and ahead of Stoney Ridge in most GFXBench subtests. It's actually close to HD Graphics 515 performance.

Fritz Chess Benchmark 12
Pentium J4205:
Relative speed: 10.29
Kilo nodes/sec: 4937


POV-Ray 3.7
Pentium J4205:
527 PPS / 498 secs

Very nice IPC gain relative to Pentium J2900!


Fairly close to Core 2 Quad Q9400:


PCMark 8 Home Conventional
Pentium J4205: 1640



Supreme [H]ardness
Jul 1, 2016
That's an amazing little 10W cheap monster. Its a real shame AMD dropped their small core line. Instead this little thing beats Carrizo-L/Stone Ridge. The IPC looks to be around construction cores.

One small step for mankind, one giant leap for Atom :p


Extremely [H]
Oct 22, 2000
It should be even more interesting when it moves to the more power efficient 14nm process. 10W isn't terrible, but it seems to have little performance/W benefit over Airmont.

edit: My speculation based on the jump in power consumption and performance was true: Goldmont's integer execution engine was widened to 3-issue, up from 2-issue in all previous Atoms.
Last edited:


Oct 8, 2002
And this is why folks whack folks like me - these little marvels of hardware re-engineering means you no longer HAVE to purchase Big and El Expensivo except (largely) in extremis.


Extremely [H]
Oct 22, 2000
It's still fairly low end, but more usable than prior generations of Atoms. For casual tasks, it's probably fine when paired with a sufficient amount of memory. But that's where some of the problems start. These Atoms will mostly appear in pre-builts and the "free" or low cost versions of Windows have hardware restraints that prevent more usable configurations. Costs are also pretty restrained on those low end systems. Most likely you'll see these Goldmont Atoms used in systems with 2GB of memory and slow (and soldered) eMMC storage of insufficient size to really be generally useful.

OTOH, *sometimes* there are fairly nice low end systems like this Cherry Trail one: (tldr; $190 mini PC with x7-Z8700 CPU, 4GB DC RAM, 128GB M.2 SSD) That uses a 2W Atom, but the concept should work for Goldmont in a slightly bigger case to allow for a heatsink and fan.