Key Differences
In short — FX-8150 outperforms Celeron 3865U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8150 is 1910 days older than Celeron 3865U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3865U
- Consumes up to 88% less energy than AMD FX-8150 - 15 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8150 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Performs up to 1% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Celeron 3865U - 116 vs 115 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3865U - 8 vs 2 threads
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
116
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.8/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$93.19
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$93.19 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 5087 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3865U | vs | AMD FX-8150 |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel BGA 1356 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
1.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 18.0x |
Intel HD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |