Key Differences
In short — FX-4350 outperforms Celeron 3205U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-4350 is 671 days older than Celeron 3205U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3205U
- Consumes up to 88% less energy than AMD FX-4350 - 15 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-4350 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-4350
- Performs up to 7% better in Far Cry 6 than Celeron 3205U - 92 vs 86 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3205U - 4 vs 2 threads
Far Cry 6
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 3205U
Mobile • Mar 1st, 2015
FX-4350
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3205U | vs | AMD FX-4350 |
|---|---|---|
Mar 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2013 |
| Celeron | Collection | FX |
| Broadwell | Codename | Vishera |
| Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 4 |
| 2 | Threads | 4 |
| 1.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
| 15.0x | Multiplier | 19.5x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
