FX-4300 vs Athlon X4 860K

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 860K
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.22
+15%

Athlon X4 860K outperforms FX-4300 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17521875
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.493.58
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Vishera (2012−2015)
Release date12 August 2014 (9 years ago)23 October 2012 (11 years ago)
Current price$78 $40

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

FX-4300 has 631% better value for money than Athlon X4 860K.

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300 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 speed3.7 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4 GHz
L1 cache256Kno data
L2 cache4 MB4096 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size245 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,411 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-
Unlocked multiplierYesYes
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300 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
SocketFM2+AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300. 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 Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300.

PCIe version3.0n/a
PCI Express lanes16no data

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 X4 860K 2.22
+15%
FX-4300 1.93

Athlon X4 860K outperforms FX-4300 by 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Athlon X4 860K 3426
+14.7%
FX-4300 2987

Athlon X4 860K outperforms FX-4300 by 15% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Athlon X4 860K 465
+3.6%
FX-4300 449

Athlon X4 860K outperforms FX-4300 by 4% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Athlon X4 860K 1152
+5.4%
FX-4300 1093

Athlon X4 860K outperforms FX-4300 by 5% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

3DMark Fire Strike Physics

Benchmark coverage: 4%

Athlon X4 860K 3910
FX-4300 7010
+79.3%

FX-4300 outperforms Athlon X4 860K by 79% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.22 1.93
Recency 12 August 2014 23 October 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

The Athlon X4 860K is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 860K and FX-4300, 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 X4 860K
Athlon X4 860K
AMD FX-4300
FX-4300

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.


3.8 236 votes

Rate Athlon X4 860K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 1632 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 860K or FX-4300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.