Celeron G3902E vs FX-8300
Primary details
Comparing FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1564 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 3.35 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 23 October 2012 (12 years ago) | 2 January 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E 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 cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 98.57 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 1750 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.075 V - Max: 1.2875 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM3+ | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | LPDDR3-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E.
| PCIe version | n/a | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 23 October 2012 | 2 January 2016 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 25 Watt |
FX-8300 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Celeron G3902E, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 280% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that FX-8300 is a desktop processor while Celeron G3902E is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8300 and Celeron G3902E, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
