Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron D 315J

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron D 315J

Report a correction
Much lower annual home energy cost 17.59 $/year vs 34.18 $/year Around 50% lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 63.95 $/year vs 114.41 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 4100

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 4100

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 0.25 MB 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 2.26 GHz Around 60% higher clock speed
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.66 GHz vs 3.1 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.99 GHz vs 2.27 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 70.5 °C vs 67 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Newer Oct, 2011 vs Jul, 2004 Release date over 7 years later

Features Key features of the Celeron D 315J  vs FX 4100 

clock speed

Celeron D 315J
2.26 GHz
FX 4100
3.6 GHz

L2 cache

Celeron D 315J
0.25 MB
FX 4100
4 MB

overclocked clock speed (air)

Celeron D 315J
3.1 GHz
FX 4100
4.66 GHz

overclocked clock speed (water)

Celeron D 315J
2.27 GHz
FX 4100
4.99 GHz

TDP

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron D 315J  vs
FX 4100 
Clock speed 2.26 GHz 3.6 GHz
Cores Single core Quad core
Socket type
478
AM3+

features

Has a NX bit No Yes
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 73W 95W
Annual home energy cost 17.59 $/year 34.18 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 63.95 $/year 114.41 $/year
Typical power consumption 59.31W N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Supports ECC No Yes

details

Celeron D 315J  vs
FX 4100 
Architecture x86 x86-64
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 0.25 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 125,000,000 1,200,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 1.25 - 1.4V 1.14 - 1.55V
Operating temperature Unknown - 67°C Unknown - 70.5°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.1 GHz 4.66 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.27 GHz 4.99 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 540.3 2,972.7
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.1 GHz 4.66 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

bus

Architecture FSB HyperTransport 3.1
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 533 MHz 3,200 MHz
Intel Celeron D 315J
Report a correction
AMD FX 4100
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus