Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Celeron G3930 outperforms the more expensive FX-8350 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Celeron G3930 is 1533 days newer than the more expensive FX-8350.
Advantages of AMD FX-8350
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Performs up to 1% better in God of War than FX-8350 - 164 vs 163 FPS
- Up to 47% cheaper than FX-8350 - $98.02 vs $185.0
- Up to 47% better value when playing God of War than FX-8350 - $0.6 vs $1.13 per FPS
- Consumes up to 59% less energy than AMD FX-8350 - 51 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8350 doesn't have integrated graphics
God of War
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
163
99.39024390243902%
Value, $/FPS
$1.13/FPS
53.09734513274337%
Price, $
$185
52%
Buy for $185 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 360849 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
164
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.6/FPS
100%
Price, $
$98.02
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $98.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 360849 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8350 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
FX | Collection | Celeron |
Vishera | Codename | Kaby Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
4.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 51 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |