Celeron N3350 vs FX-8320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.43
+390%
Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.70

FX-8320 outperforms Celeron N3350 by a whopping 390% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15492707
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.6011.04
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$24

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed3.5 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz2.4 GHz
Multiplierno data11
L2 cache8192 KB1 MB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 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+FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N3350. 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-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 500
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N3350.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanesno data6
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX-8320 3.43
+390%
Celeron N3350 0.70

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-8320 5443
+392%
Celeron N3350 1107

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.

FX-8320 460
+82.5%
Celeron N3350 252

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.

FX-8320 1808
+333%
Celeron N3350 418

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.43 0.70
Recency 23 October 2012 30 August 2016
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 6 Watt

FX-8320 has a 390% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Celeron N3350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 1983.3% lower power consumption.

The FX-8320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.

Note that FX-8320 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3350 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Celeron N3350, 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-8320
FX-8320
Intel Celeron N3350
Celeron N3350

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.


4.2 1389 votes

Rate FX-8320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 956 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.