Key Differences
In short — FX-8320 outperforms Celeron 1000M on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8320 is 89 days older than Celeron 1000M.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 1000M
- Consumes up to 72% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 35 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Performs up to 10% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Celeron 1000M - 236 vs 215 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 1000M - 8 vs 2 threads
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Buy for CA$111.14 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 66727 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2013
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2013
Single-Core
297
64.70588235294117%
Multi-Core
511
28.092358438702586%
Intel Celeron 1000M | vs | AMD FX-8320 |
---|---|---|
Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
1.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
35 W | TDP | 125 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |