Key Differences
In short — FX-8150 outperforms Celeron 847 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8150 is 115 days newer than Celeron 847.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 847
- Consumes up to 86% less energy than AMD FX-8150 - 17 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 Control than Celeron 847 - 199 vs 198 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 847 - 8 vs 2 threads
Control
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Celeron 847
Mobile • Jun 19th, 2011
FX-8150
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 847 | vs | AMD FX-8150 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 19th, 2011 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
| Celeron | Collection | FX |
| Sandy Bridge | Codename | Zambezi |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 2 | Threads | 8 |
| 1.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
17 W | TDP | 125 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
| 11.0x | Multiplier | 18.0x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
