Celeron N3350 vs FX-8350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8350
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.84
+433%

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by a whopping 433% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking13872593
Place by popularity99not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.94no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD FX-Series (Desktop)Intel Celeron
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Apollo Lake (2016)
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$24
Current price$200 $251 (10.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 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 speed4 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz2.4 GHz
L2 cache8192 KB2 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 multiplierYesNo
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8350 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
SocketAM3+FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Core, HT3.1no data
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
Statusno dataLaunched
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

FX-8350 and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 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
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Videono data+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8350 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8350 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 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-8350 3.84
+433%
Celeron N3350 0.72

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 433% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

FX-8350 5936
+436%
Celeron N3350 1107

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 436% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

FX-8350 489
+93.3%
Celeron N3350 253

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 93% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

FX-8350 1993
+379%
Celeron N3350 416

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 379% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

FX-8350 3201
+115%
Celeron N3350 1490

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 115% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-8350 16904
+537%
Celeron N3350 2654

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 537% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-8350 6648
+302%
Celeron N3350 1655

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 302% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

FX-8350 8.34
+446%
Celeron N3350 45.5

Celeron N3350 outperforms FX-8350 by 446% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FX-8350 7
+521%
Celeron N3350 1

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 521% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

FX-8350 636
+648%
Celeron N3350 85

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 648% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

FX-8350 97
+111%
Celeron N3350 46

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 111% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

FX-8350 1.1
+86.4%
Celeron N3350 0.59

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 86% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-8350 3.6
+454%
Celeron N3350 0.7

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 454% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-8350 4562
+641%
Celeron N3350 616

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 641% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-8350 44
+602%
Celeron N3350 6

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 602% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-8350 139
+327%
Celeron N3350 33

FX-8350 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 327% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.84 0.72
Recency 23 October 2012 1 September 2016
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 6 Watt

The FX-8350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.

Note that FX-8350 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3350 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 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-8350
FX-8350
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 3413 votes

Rate FX-8350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 899 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-8350 or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.