CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4130 vs 4300 among desktop CPUs

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

8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i3 4130 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 4130  based on its performance and 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 4130

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 4130

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 4130

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 4130

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly lower typical power consumption 43.88W vs 77.19W Around 45% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,972 vs 1,417 Around 40% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly better performance per watt 12.63 pt/W vs 6.8 pt/W More than 85% better performance per watt
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Oct, 2012 Release date 8 months later
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year vs 83.22 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year vs 22.89 $/year Around 45% lower annual home energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 4300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 4300

Report a correction
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Significantly 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
Higher clock speed 3.8 GHz vs 3.4 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Slightly 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 overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.5 GHz vs 3.47 GHz Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better performance per dollar 8.71 pt/$ vs 6.96 pt/$ More than 25% better performance per dollar
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.77 GHz vs 3.53 GHz More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 4130 vs FX 4300

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
6,330
FX 4300
5,582

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
2,982
FX 4300
1,981

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
3,840,000 MB/s
FX 4300
2,210,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
6,256
FX 4300
5,404

GeekBench

Core i3 4130
6,772
FX 4300
5,404

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 4130
4,798
FX 4300
4,676

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 4130
1,972
FX 4300
1,417

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 4130  vs
FX 4300 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
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
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 54W 95W
Annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 12.63 pt/W 6.8 pt/W
Typical power consumption 43.88W 77.19W

details

Core i3 4130  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 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.47 GHz 4.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.53 GHz 4.77 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.47 GHz 4.5 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD graphics 4400 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 4130
Report a correction
AMD FX 4300
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Well Actually if you are gonna buy a graphics card then u should go witjh 4300 cuz itz cheaper :P and it has higher speed. i3 is winner jst becuz of Integrated graphics :/
comments powered by Disqus