FX-4100 vs FX-8320

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.43
+108%
FX-4100
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.65

FX-8320 outperforms FX-4100 by a whopping 108% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and FX-4100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15482069
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.601.64
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)12 October 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and FX-4100 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache8192 KB4096 KB
L3 cacheno data8192 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °C71 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier++
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 VMin: 1.1 V - Max: 1.4125 V

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and FX-4100 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
SocketAM3+AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and FX-4100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and FX-4100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and FX-4100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and FX-4100.

PCIe versionn/an/a

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
+108%
FX-4100 1.65

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
+108%
FX-4100 2618

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
+16.2%
FX-4100 396

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
+80.3%
FX-4100 1003

3DMark Fire Strike Physics

FX-8320 6460
+95.8%
FX-4100 3300

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.43 1.65
Recency 23 October 2012 12 October 2011
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 8 4
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt

FX-8320 has a 107.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

FX-4100, on the other hand, has 31.6% lower power consumption.

The FX-8320 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4100 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and FX-4100, 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
AMD FX-4100
FX-4100

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
3.8 888 votes

Rate FX-4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or FX-4100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.