CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3220 vs 4300

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Cinebench R11.5, Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Cinebench R11.5 (1-core), Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and 1 more

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?

Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

Winner
Intel Core i3 3220 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 3220  based on its single-core performance.

See full details

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

Intel Core i3 3220

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 3220

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 3220

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3220

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Lower typical power consumption 44.69W vs 77.19W More than 40% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,764 vs 1,420 Around 25% better PassMark (Single core) score
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score 5,814 vs 4,114 More than 40% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score
Better performance per watt 10.15 pt/W vs 6.6 pt/W Around 55% better performance per watt
Lower annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 40% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 40% 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 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
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
More l3 cache 4 MB vs 3 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Significantly better performance per dollar 6.97 pt/$ vs 4.47 pt/$ More than 55% better performance per dollar
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.68 GHz vs 3.44 GHz More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better 3DMark11 physics score 6,610 vs 4,030 Around 65% better 3DMark11 physics score
Better cinebench r11.5 score 3.47 vs 2.73 More than 25% better cinebench r11.5 score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 5 GHz vs 3.53 GHz More than 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3220 vs FX 4300

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i3 3220
5,363
FX 4300
5,477

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i3 3220
4,030
FX 4300
6,610
Core i3 3220 FX 4300 @ community.futuremark.com

Cinebench R11.5

FX 4300
3.47

Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)

FX 4300
1.06

Passmark

Core i3 3220
4,229
FX 4300
4,713
Core i3 3220 FX 4300 @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

Core i3 3220
1,764
FX 4300
1,420

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 3220  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
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

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

details

Core i3 3220  vs
FX 4300 
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 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclock popularity 50 7
Overclocked clock speed 3.44 GHz 4.68 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.53 GHz 5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.44 GHz 4.68 GHz

power consumption

TDP 55W 95W
Annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 10.15 pt/W 6.6 pt/W
Typical power consumption 44.69W 77.19W
Intel Core i3 3220
Report a correction
AMD FX 4300
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
so..which one is better? in term of long continuous usage (for downloading, etc)
comments powered by Disqus