FX-8100 vs Athlon II M300

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II M300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42
FX-8100
2011
8 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
2.55
+507%

FX-8100 outperforms Athlon II M300 by a whopping 507% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II M300 and FX-8100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29831750
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Athlon IIno data
Power efficiency1.132.54
Architecture codenameCaspian (2009)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date10 September 2009 (15 years ago)12 October 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon II M300 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speedno data2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus rate3200 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KB384 KB
L2 cache1 MB8 MB
L3 cacheno data8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data315 mm2
Number of transistorsno data1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II M300 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 configurationno data1
SocketSocket S1 (S1g3)AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II M300 and FX-8100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualizationno data
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
PowerNow+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II M300 and FX-8100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II M300 and FX-8100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR2DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II M300 and FX-8100.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

Athlon II M300 0.42
FX-8100 2.55
+507%

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.

Athlon II M300 670
FX-8100 4055
+505%

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.

Athlon II M300 213
FX-8100 411
+93%

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.

Athlon II M300 403
FX-8100 1819
+351%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.42 2.55
Recency 10 September 2009 12 October 2011
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 95 Watt

Athlon II M300 has 171.4% lower power consumption.

FX-8100, on the other hand, has a 507.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The FX-8100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II M300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Athlon II M300 is a notebook processor while FX-8100 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II M300 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 Athlon II M300
Athlon II M300
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.


3.6 60 votes

Rate Athlon II M300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 64 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 Athlon II M300 or FX-8100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.