C-60 vs FX-4300
Primary details
Comparing FX-4300 and C-60 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1920 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD C-Series |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Ontario (2010−2012) |
| Release date | 23 October 2012 (11 years ago) | 22 August 2011 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
FX-4300 and C-60 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 1.33 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on FX-4300 and C-60 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3+ | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and C-60. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and C-60 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and C-60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon HD 6290 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and C-60.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no 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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 23 October 2012 | 22 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 9 Watt |
FX-4300 has an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
C-60, on the other hand, has 955.6% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between FX-4300 and C-60. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while C-60 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and C-60, 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.
