Celeron J1850 vs FX-4320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4320
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.06
+232%

FX-4320 outperforms Celeron J1850 by a whopping 232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4320 and Celeron J1850 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19192788
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.985.65
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$82

Detailed specifications

FX-4320 and Celeron J1850 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 speed4 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz2 GHz
L1 cache192 KB224 KB
L2 cache4096 KB2 MB
L3 cache4096 KB2 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature71 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on FX-4320 and Celeron J1850 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 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4320 and Celeron J1850. 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-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

FX-4320 and Celeron J1850 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-4320 and Celeron J1850 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4320 and Celeron J1850. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4320 and Celeron J1850 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4320 and Celeron J1850.

PCIe versionNot Listed2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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-4320 2.06
+232%
Celeron J1850 0.62

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-4320 3150
+234%
Celeron J1850 942

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.06 0.62
Recency 23 October 2012 1 September 2013
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 10 Watt

FX-4320 has a 232.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron J1850, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 850% lower power consumption.

The FX-4320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1850 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4320 is a desktop processor while Celeron J1850 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4320 and Celeron J1850, 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-4320
FX-4320
Intel Celeron J1850
Celeron J1850

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.


3.5 135 votes

Rate FX-4320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 11 votes

Rate Celeron J1850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4320 or Celeron J1850, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.