Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Celeron G3930T outperforms the more expensive FX-8150 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Celeron G3930T is 1910 days newer than the more expensive FX-8150.
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930T - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930T
- Performs up to 1% better in Overwatch 2 than FX-8150 - 320 vs 318 FPS
- Up to 39% cheaper than FX-8150 - $39.0 vs $64.03
- Up to 40% better value when playing Overwatch 2 than FX-8150 - $0.12 vs $0.2 per FPS
- Consumes up to 72% less energy than AMD FX-8150 - 35 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8150 doesn't have integrated graphics
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Buy for $64.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13232 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
320
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.12/FPS
100%
Price, $
$39
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $39 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13232 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8150 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930T |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
FX | Collection | Celeron |
Zambezi | Codename | Kaby Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 35 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |