Key Differences
In short — FX-8300 outperforms Core i3-3217U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8300 is 144 days newer than Core i3-3217U.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3217U
- 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 Overwatch 2 than Core i3-3217U - 318 vs 313 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-3217U - 8 vs 4 threads
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Core i3-3217U
Mobile • Jun 1st, 2012
FX-8300
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-3217U | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 1st, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| Core i3 | Collection | FX |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 4 | Threads | 8 |
| 1.8 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 |
18.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
