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 Core i3 2125

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2125

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 77.19W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 4300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 4300

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Significantly higher clock speed 3.8 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 15% higher clock speed
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.48 GHz vs 3.49 GHz Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.98 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Higher Maximum operating temperature 70.5 °C vs 69.1 °C Almost the same
Newer Oct, 2012 vs Jul, 2011 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 2125 vs FX 4300

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 2125
5,105
FX 4300
5,582

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 2125
2,425
FX 4300
1,981

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 2125
160,600 MB/s
FX 4300
2,210,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 2125
5,119
FX 4300
5,404

GeekBench

Core i3 2125
8,947
FX 4300
5,404

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 2125
3,996
FX 4300
4,651

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 2125
1,705
FX 4300
1,406

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 2125  vs
FX 4300 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1155
AM3+
Is unlocked No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 65W 95W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 2.79 pt/W 9.24 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 77.19W

details

Core i3 2125  vs
FX 4300 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 4 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 33 20
Operating temperature Unknown - 69.1°C Unknown - 70.5°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 0 7
Overclocked clock speed 3.49 GHz 4.48 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.3 GHz 4.98 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.49 GHz 4.48 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 850 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 21,333.32 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 2125
Report a correction
AMD FX 4300
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus