Winner
AMD FX 4130
CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 4130 based on its overclocking.
See full details | Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD FX 4130 |
![]() | Has a built-in GPU Yes | ![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 44.69W |
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | ![]() | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year |
![]() | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | ![]() | Is unlocked Yes |
![]() | Significantly higher clock speed 3.8 GHz | ![]() | More cores 4 |
The average person does a lot of work on his computer, like writing e-mails or drafting papers. Though common tasks need only a budget CPU, sometimes he may need extra performance for his other interests such as audio editing or Photoshop. For this matchup, we’re comparing two desktop CPUs which are capable yet reasonably priced: the Intel Core i3 3220 versus the AMD FX 4130. Which is the better value?
The 3220 is part of the Core i3 series, Intel’s entry level chip geared towards smart performance. It’s a Dual Core clocked at 3.3 GHz, with 3MB cache, integrated HD 2500 graphics and a power consumption of 55W TDP. One of its unique features is Hyperthreading, which efficiently optimizes each processor core for multi-threaded applications.
On the other side is the 4130, part of the FX series which, according to AMD, will transform your PC into a multimedia powerhouse. It’s a Quad Core clocked at 3.8 GHz, with 8MB cache and a much higher power consumption of 125W, twice that of the 3220. Moreover, it doesn’t come with integrated graphics, so you have to buy a discrete video card or else you won’t see anything on your monitor. On the plus side however, it has an unlocked multiplier which is ideal for overclocking.
Looking at their real world performance, the Quad Core 4130 is the more dominant CPU: it led by 6-12% in the PassMark and 3Dmark11 physics benchmarks. However, the 3220 was able to win by 26% in the Single Core test, which means that it’s the more efficient CPU.
Considering that the 4130 is also cheaper by $20, it seems that on paper, it’s the no-brainer choice. But factor in the higher power consumption and the need for a separate video card, and you’ll end up spending a lot more. Therefore, we recommend the stable and reliable Intel Core i3 3220 as the better value overall.
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
Fire Strike |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more |
6.1 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
| |||||||
Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much lower typical power consumption | 44.69W | vs | 101.56W | 2.3x lower typical power consumption | |||
Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 48.18 $/year | vs | 109.5 $/year | 2.3x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 13.25 $/year | vs | 30.11 $/year | 2.3x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 0.5 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 | 3.8 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 more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.41 GHz | vs | 3.43 GHz | Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature | 70 °C | vs | 65.3 °C | More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.69 GHz | vs | 3.46 GHz | More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
summary | Core i3 3220 | vs | FX 4130 |
---|---|---|---|
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 | |||
SSE2 | |||
F16C | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
XOP | |||
AVX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
ABM | |||
CLMUL | |||
AMD64 | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
FMA4 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
CVT16 | |||
AMD-V | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 55W | 125W | |
Annual home energy cost | 13.25 $/year | 30.11 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 48.18 $/year | 109.5 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 2.69 pt/W | 6.77 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 44.69W | 101.56W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | DMI | HyperTransport 3.1 |
details | Core i3 3220 | vs | FX 4130 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 4 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 0.5 MB | 4 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
L3 cache | 3 MB | 4 MB | |
L3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 22 nm | 32 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 33 | 20 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 65.3°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 3.43 GHz | 4.41 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.46 GHz | 4.69 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | 4.41 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | GPU | None | |
Label | Intel® HD Graphics 2500 | N/A | |
Number of displays supported | 3 | 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 | |||
DDR3-1600 | |||
DDR3-1333 | |||
DDR3 | |||
Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
Supports ECC | No | Yes | |
Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s |
Intel Core i3 3220 ![]() | AMD FX 4130 ![]() |
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$50 | $125 | |
5300 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
Q6600 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$75 | $125 | |
G2020 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$50 | $125 | |
5400K vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$76 | $125 | |
G2030 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$145 | $125 | |
E8400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$205 | $125 | |
2400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | ||
7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$50 | $125 | |
5300 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||