Celeron E1400 vs FX-9370

VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-9370 and Celeron E1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1433not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.69no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Allendale (2006−2009)
Release date6 July 2013 (11 years ago)April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$57

Detailed specifications

FX-9370 and Celeron E1400 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 speed4.4 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.7 GHz2 GHz
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache8192 KB512 KB (shared)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size315 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperature57 °C73 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.375 V - Max: 1.5375 Vno data
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.5V

Compatibility

Information on FX-9370 and Celeron E1400 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+LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)220 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9370 and Celeron E1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

FX-9370 and Celeron E1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9370 and Celeron E1400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9370 and Celeron E1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9370 and Celeron E1400.

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.



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-9370 6255
+751%
Celeron E1400 735

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-9370 510
+132%
Celeron E1400 220

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-9370 2019
+415%
Celeron E1400 392

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 220 Watt 65 Watt

FX-9370 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron E1400, on the other hand, has 238.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-9370 and Celeron E1400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9370 and Celeron E1400, 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-9370
FX-9370
Intel Celeron E1400
Celeron E1400

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.


4 159 votes

Rate FX-9370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 61 vote

Rate Celeron E1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9370 or Celeron E1400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.