FX-8100 vs FX-4300

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4300
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.95

FX-8100 outperforms FX-4300 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and FX-8100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19681730
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.872.54
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)12 October 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and FX-8100 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed3.8 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data384 KB
L2 cache4096 KB8 MB
L3 cacheno data8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million1,200 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 FX-8100 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+AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and FX-8100. 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 FX-8100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and FX-8100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

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 FX-8100.

PCIe versionn/a2.0

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 1.95
FX-8100 2.65
+35.9%

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
FX-8100 4055
+35.8%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

FX-4300 453
+10.2%
FX-8100 411

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

FX-4300 1101
FX-8100 1819
+65.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.95 2.65
Recency 23 October 2012 12 October 2011
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 8

FX-4300 has an age advantage of 1 year.

FX-8100, on the other hand, has a 35.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The FX-8100 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and FX-8100, 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
AMD FX-8100
FX-8100

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 1713 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 62 votes

Rate FX-8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or FX-8100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.