Celeron N2920 vs FX-4100

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4100
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.65
+175%
Celeron N2920
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 7 Watt
0.60

FX-4100 outperforms Celeron N2920 by a whopping 175% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20712793
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.648.11
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date12 October 2011 (13 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.6 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz2 GHz
L1 cache192 KB56K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache8192 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature71 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM3+FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4100 and Celeron N2920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4100 and Celeron N2920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data844 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4100 and Celeron N2920 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4100 and Celeron N2920.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX-4100 1.65
+175%
Celeron N2920 0.60

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

FX-4100 2618
+176%
Celeron N2920 950

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.65 0.60
Recency 12 October 2011 1 December 2013
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 7 Watt

FX-4100 has a 175% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron N2920, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 1257.1% lower power consumption.

The FX-4100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2920 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4100 is a desktop processor while Celeron N2920 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4100 and Celeron N2920, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD FX-4100
FX-4100
Intel Celeron N2920
Celeron N2920

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 891 vote

Rate FX-4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 32 votes

Rate Celeron N2920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4100 or Celeron N2920, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.