Key Differences
In short — FX-8300 outperforms Celeron 1007U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8300 is 89 days older than Celeron 1007U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 1007U
- Consumes up to 82% less energy than AMD FX-8300 - 17 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8300
- Performs up to 2% better in Assassin's Creed Valhalla than Celeron 1007U - 167 vs 164 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 1007U - 8 vs 2 threads
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
167
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.44/FPS
100%
Price, €
€73.57
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €73.57 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 48 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2013
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 1007U | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
---|---|---|
Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
1.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
17 W | TDP | 95 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
15.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |