In Atomfall, the Celeron 1007U is slightly slower than the FX-4350. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron 1007U
- Consumes up to 86% less energy – 17 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 86% less energy
FX-4350
- Up to 3% faster in Atomfall – 187 vs 181 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Atomfall
- Is 3 months and 7 days newer – Apr 29, 2013 vs Jan 20, 2013
- Is 3 months and 7 days newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Celeron 1007U vs FX-4350: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Average FPS
187 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$82.71
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.44/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron 1007U vs FX-4350 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron 1007U vs FX-4350 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron 1007U
Jan 20th, 2013
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
1.5 GHz
36%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron 1007U Jan 20th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-4350 Apr 29th, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2013 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | AM3+ |
17W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
