Celeron 725C vs FX-8100
Primary details
Comparing FX-8100 and Celeron 725C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1734 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 2.54 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zambezi (2011−2012) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 12 October 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 July 2011 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
FX-8100 and Celeron 725C 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 1.5 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 504 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8100 and Celeron 725C 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+ | Intel BGA1023 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8100 and Celeron 725C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8100 and Celeron 725C are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8100 and Celeron 725C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8100 and Celeron 725C.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 12 October 2011 | 1 July 2011 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
FX-8100 has an age advantage of 3 months, and 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads.
Celeron 725C, on the other hand, has 458.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between FX-8100 and Celeron 725C. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that FX-8100 is a desktop processor while Celeron 725C is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8100 and Celeron 725C, 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.
