FX-8100 vs Celeron M U3600
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1710 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Zambezi (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 18 December 2010 (13 years ago) | 12 October 2011 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M U3600 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 315 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M U3600 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | BGA1288 | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 18 December 2010 | 12 October 2011 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 95 Watt |
Celeron M U3600 has 427.8% lower power consumption.
FX-8100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M U3600 is a notebook processor while FX-8100 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3600 and FX-8100, 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.
