Processor N100 vs FX-8350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8350
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.84
+16.7%
Processor N100
2023
4 cores / 44 x 3.4 GHz Intel Crestmont E-Core threads, 6 Watt
3.29

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and Processor N100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking13901514
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.14no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD FX-Series (Desktop)Intel Alder Lake-N
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Alder Lake-N
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$128
Current price$162 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 and Processor N100 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)
Threads844 x 3.4  GHz Intel Crestmont E-Core
Base clock speed4 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache8192 KB2 MB (shared)
L3 cacheno data6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
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 Processor N100 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+Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and Processor N100. 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++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Security technologies

FX-8350 and Processor N100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and Processor N100 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and Processor N100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and Processor N100.

PCIe versionn/a3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9

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
+16.7%
Processor N100 3.29

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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
Processor N100 4869
+52.1%

Processor N100 outperforms FX-8350 by 52% 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
+11.2%
Processor N100 15207

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 11% 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
+3.3%
Processor N100 6435

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 3% 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
+90.8%
Processor N100 15.91

Processor N100 outperforms FX-8350 by 91% 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
+33%
Processor N100 5

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 33% 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
+36.2%
Processor N100 467

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 36% 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
Processor N100 152
+56.7%

Processor N100 outperforms FX-8350 by 57% 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
Processor N100 1.83
+66.4%

Processor N100 outperforms FX-8350 by 66% 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
+24.1%
Processor N100 2.9

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 24% 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
+92.3%
Processor N100 2372

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 92% 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
+28.5%
Processor N100 34

FX-8350 outperforms Processor N100 by 29% 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
Processor N100 173
+24.4%

Processor N100 outperforms FX-8350 by 24% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.84 3.29
Recency 23 October 2012 3 January 2023
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 8 44 x 3.4 GHz Intel Crestmont E-Core
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 6 Watt

The FX-8350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Processor N100 in performance tests.

Note that FX-8350 is a desktop processor while Processor N100 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 and Processor N100, 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 Processor N100
Processor N100

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 3433 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 869 votes

Rate Processor N100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8350 or Processor N100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.