Core m3-8100Y vs FX-8800P

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX-8800P
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
1.84
Core m3-8100Y
2018
2 cores / 4 threads
1.86
+1.1%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking18811874
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoCore m3
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Amber Lake-Y (2018−2021)
Release date3 June 2015 (8 years ago)30 August 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$281
Current price$515 $442 (1.6x MSRP)

Technical specs

FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.1 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache2048 KB512 KB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FCBGA1515
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.0Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI1+
FMAFMA4no data
AVXAVX+
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune-no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
HSA+no data
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSXno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y are enumerated here.

AMD-V1+
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3, DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data33.3 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsIntel UHD Graphics 615
iGPU core count8no data
Max video memoryno data16 GB
Quick Sync Videono data+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data
Graphics max frequencyno data900 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data3840x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data3840x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 1212
OpenGLno data4.5
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data10

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-8800P 1.84
m3-8100Y 1.86
+1.1%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 1% based on our aggregated 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-8800P 2851
m3-8100Y 2870
+0.7%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 1% in Passmark.

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-8800P 2604
m3-8100Y 3850
+47.8%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 48% 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-8800P 7860
+29.8%
m3-8100Y 6055

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 30% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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-8800P 12.02
+54.5%
m3-8100Y 18.57

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 54% in wPrime 32.

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-8800P 277
+54.3%
m3-8100Y 180

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 54% 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-8800P 82
m3-8100Y 97
+17.8%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 18% in Cinebench 15 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-8800P 2.2
+29.4%
m3-8100Y 1.7

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 29% 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-8800P 1543
m3-8100Y 1646
+6.7%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 7% in WinRAR 4.0.

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-8800P 94
+60.4%
m3-8100Y 58

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 60% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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-8800P 21
+88.1%
m3-8100Y 11

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 88% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-8800P 2085
m3-8100Y 2702
+29.6%

Core m3-8100Y outperforms FX-8800P by 30% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-8800P 6349
+16.6%
m3-8100Y 5446

FX-8800P outperforms Core m3-8100Y by 17% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.84 1.86
Integrated graphics card 1.58
Recency 3 June 2015 30 August 2018
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 5 Watt

We couldn't decide between FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8800P and Core m3-8100Y, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD FX-8800P
FX-8800P
Intel Core m3-8100Y
Core m3-8100Y

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.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 94 votes

Rate FX-8800P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 110 votes

Rate Core m3-8100Y on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8800P or Core m3-8100Y, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.