Celeron N6211 vs FX-8320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.56
+142%

FX-8320 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a whopping 142% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and Celeron N6211 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15252169
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.33
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataElkhart Lake
Power efficiency2.5920.58
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Elkhart Lake (2022)
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)17 July 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$54

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and Celeron N6211 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 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3 GHz
L2 cache8192 KB1.5 MB
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C70 °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 N6211 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM3+BGA1493
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N6211. 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-8320 and Celeron N6211 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N6211. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Celeron N6211.

PCIe versionn/ano 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 3.56
+142%
Celeron N6211 1.47

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 5444
+142%
Celeron N6211 2245

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.56 1.47
Recency 23 October 2012 17 July 2022
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 6 Watt

FX-8320 has a 142.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Celeron N6211, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 1983.3% lower power consumption.

The FX-8320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Celeron N6211, 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 N6211
Celeron N6211

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 1344 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 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 N6211, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.