Celeron M 530 vs FX-4300

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and Celeron M 530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1971not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataCeleron M
Power efficiency1.87no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and Celeron M 530 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.8 GHz1.73 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz1.73 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L2 cache4096 KBno data
L3 cacheno data1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature71 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data
VID voltage rangeno data0.95V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and Celeron M 530 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+PBGA479,PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and Celeron M 530. 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-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

FX-4300 and Celeron M 530 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and Celeron M 530 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and Celeron M 530. 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 M 530.

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.



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 2983
+888%
Celeron M 530 302

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 30 Watt

FX-4300 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 530, on the other hand, has 216.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-4300 and Celeron M 530. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 530 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and Celeron M 530, 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 M 530
Celeron M 530

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 1727 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 40 votes

Rate Celeron M 530 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 M 530, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.