Celeron U3600 vs FX-4300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1942not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Westmere (2010−2011)
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)11 January 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 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 speed3.8 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz0.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rateno data1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data9
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache4096 KB512 KB
L3 cacheno data2 MB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm281 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million382 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM3+BGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and Celeron U3600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA++
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and Celeron U3600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-800
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data12.799 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data500 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4300 and Celeron U3600 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and Celeron U3600.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

FX-4300 2986
+416%
Celeron U3600 579

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 11 January 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 18 Watt

FX-4300 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron U3600, on the other hand, has 427.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-4300 and Celeron U3600. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while Celeron U3600 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and Celeron U3600, 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-4300
FX-4300
Intel Celeron U3600
Celeron U3600

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 1691 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1 vote

Rate Celeron U3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or Celeron U3600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.