Celeron Dual-Core T1500 vs FX-8320

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1546not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency2.60no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 May 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed3.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed4 GHz1.87 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L2 cache8192 KB512 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 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+no data
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500. 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-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500.

PCIe versionn/ano data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 1 May 2008
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 35 Watt

FX-8320 has an age advantage of 4 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron Dual-Core T1500, on the other hand, has 257.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-8320 is a desktop processor while Celeron Dual-Core T1500 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Celeron Dual-Core T1500, 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-8320
FX-8320
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1500
Celeron Dual-Core T1500

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.


4.2 1377 votes

Rate FX-8320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 6 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or Celeron Dual-Core T1500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.