Key Differences
In short — Core i3-3220 outperforms the cheaper FX-4300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-4300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-3220 is 50 days older than the cheaper FX-4300.
Advantages of AMD FX-4300
- Up to 48% cheaper than Core i3-3220 - CA$36.09 vs CA$69.88
- Up to 46% better value when playing F1 23 than Core i3-3220 - CA$0.25 vs CA$0.46 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3220
- Performs up to 4% better in F1 23 than FX-4300 - 153 vs 147 FPS
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than AMD FX-4300 - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-4300 doesn't have integrated graphics
F1 23
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
147
96%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.25/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$36.09
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$36.09 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13911 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
153
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.46/FPS
54%
Price, CA$
CA$69.88
51%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$69.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13911 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-4300 | vs | Intel Core i3-3220 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 3rd, 2012 |
FX | Collection | Core i3 |
Vishera | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 4 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
95 W | TDP | 55 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
19.0x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |