In Deathloop, the Core i3-4150T is slightly slower than the FX-8300. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $79 cheaper!
Core i3-4150T
- Is 1 year and 6 months newer – May 01, 2014 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 1 year and 6 months newer
- Up to 75% cheaper – $26.99 vs $106.06
- Up to 75% cheaper
- Up to 75% better value in Deathloop – $0.12 vs $0.48/FPS
- Up to 75% better value in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 35 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
FX-8300
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 220 vs 218 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-4150T vs FX-8300: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-4150T
May 1st, 2014
Average FPS
218 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
163 FPS
99%
Price, $
$26.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.12/FPS
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
220 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
165 FPS
100%
Price, $
$106.06
25%
Value, $/FPS
$0.48/FPS
25%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-4150T vs FX-8300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-4150T vs FX-8300 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-4150T
May 1st, 2014
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
3 MB
38%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
88%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-4150T May 1st, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
May 1st, 2014 | Released | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1150 | Socket | AM3+ |
35 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD 4400 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
