Core i3-4360T vs FX-4150

Core i3-4360T vs FX-4150 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4360T

2 / 4

3,294

0.0%

3,327

+1.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-4360T vs FX-4150 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-4360T vs FX-4150: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-4360T

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 95W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, while FX-4150 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,294 vs 3,327).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌
0.7% HIGHER MSRP
$138 MSRPvs$137 MSRP

FX-4150

2012

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Costs $1 less on MSRP ($137 MSRP vs $138 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌171.4% higher power demand at 95W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4360T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4150 better than Core i3-4360T?

Yes. FX-4150 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-4150 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-4150 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

FX-4150 is the better buy right now. FX-4150 comes in $1 cheaper on MSRP at $137 MSRP versus $138 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1.7% better value on MSRP (24.3 vs 23.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-4360T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4360T vs FX-4150 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-4360T

The Core i3-4360T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 July 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,294 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-4150

The FX-4150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,327 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4360T packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4150 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-4360T versus 4 GHz on the FX-4150 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the FX-4150 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i3-4360T uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-4150 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4360T scores 3,294 against the FX-4150's 3,327 — a 1% lead for the FX-4150. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4360T vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-4150.

Feature	Core i3-4360T	FX-4150
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	4 GHz+25%
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	3.8 GHz+19%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	8 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	4 MB+1500%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	3,294	3,327+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4360T uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4150 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4360T	FX-4150
Socket	LGA1150	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4360T) / not specified (FX-4150). The Core i3-4360T includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the FX-4150 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4360T targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i3-4360T	FX-4150
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 4600	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-4360T was priced at $138, while the FX-4150 came in at $137. On launch pricing ($138 vs $137), FX-4150 was $1 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-4360T delivers 23.9 pts/$ vs 24.3 pts/$ for the FX-4150 — making the FX-4150 the 1.7% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-4360T	FX-4150
MSRP	$138	$137
Performance per Dollar	23.9	24.3+2%
Release Date	2014	2012

Search Core i3-4360T on Amazon

Search FX-4150 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.