Celeron Dual-Core T3100 vs FX-4300

Aggregate performance score

FX-4300
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.89
+155%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.74

FX-4300 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by a whopping 155% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19712663
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency1.871.99
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed4 GHz1.9 GHz
Bus rateno data800 MHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache4096 KB1 MB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size315 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM3+BGA479, PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100.

PCIe versionn/ano data

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-4300 1.89
+155%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 0.74

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-4300 2985
+154%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1174

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.89 0.74
Recency 23 October 2012 1 September 2009
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

FX-4300 has a 155.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100, on the other hand, has 171.4% lower power consumption.

The FX-4300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3100 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while Celeron Dual-Core T3100 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100, 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-4300
FX-4300
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3100
Celeron Dual-Core T3100

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.


3.9 1724 votes

Rate FX-4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 33 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or Celeron Dual-Core T3100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.