E2-3000 vs FX-4100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-4100 and E2-3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1970not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.24no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date12 October 2011 (12 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Current price$28 $202

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4100 and E2-3000 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz1.65 GHz
L1 cache192 KBno data
L2 cache4096 KB1024 KB
L3 cache8192 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size315 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesNo
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4100 and E2-3000 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
SocketAM3+FT3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4100 and E2-3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3L-1600
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data-
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data-
VirusProtectno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4100 and E2-3000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4100 and E2-3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 8280
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4100 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-4100 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4100 and E2-3000.

PCIe versionn/a2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


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%

FX-4100 2609
+259%
E2-3000 726

FX-4100 outperforms E2-3000 by 259% in Passmark.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 October 2011 23 May 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 15 Watt

We couldn't decide between FX-4100 and E2-3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-4100 is a desktop processor while E2-3000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4100 and E2-3000, 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-4100
FX-4100
AMD E2-3000
E2-3000

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.


3.9 832 votes

Rate FX-4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 26 votes

Rate E2-3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4100 or E2-3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.