Key Differences
In short — FX-6350 outperforms Celeron G540 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-6350 is 603 days newer than Celeron G540.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G540
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-6350 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6350 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Performs up to 1% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G540 - 168 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G540 - 6 vs 2 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Celeron G540
Desktop • Sep 4th, 2011
FX-6350
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G540 | vs | AMD FX-6350 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 4th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2013 |
| Celeron | Collection | FX |
| Sandy Bridge | Codename | Vishera |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 2 | Cores | 6 |
| 2 | Threads | 6 |
| 2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 125 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
25.0x | Multiplier | 19.5x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | No |
