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 2310E

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2310E

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 28.44W vs 77.19W 2.7x lower typical power consumption
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 70.5 °C More than 40% higher Maximum operating temperature
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 22.89 $/year 2.7x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 83.22 $/year 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 8300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8300

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x 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 3.3 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 55% higher clock speed
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 3 MB Around 2.8x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 2 6 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.61 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much better performance per watt 10.58 pt/W vs 3.46 pt/W More than 3x better performance per watt
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Significantly better PassMark score 7,682 vs 2,839 Around 2.8x better PassMark score
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,396 vs 1,127 Around 25% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.51 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Dec, 2012 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 2 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 2310E vs FX 8300

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

FX 8300
7,682

PassMark (Single Core)

FX 8300
1,396

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 2310E  vs
FX 8300 
Clock speed 2.1 GHz 3.3 GHz
Cores Dual core Octa core
Socket type
BGA 1023
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
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 35W 95W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 3.46 pt/W 10.58 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 77.19W

details

Core i3 2310E  vs
FX 8300 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 21 21
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 70.5°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.1 GHz 4.61 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.1 GHz 4.51 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.1 GHz 4.61 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 650 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 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
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 21,333.32 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 2310E
Report a correction
AMD FX 8300
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus