Core m3-7Y32 vs FX-4130

Core m3-7Y32 vs FX-4130 Performance Spectrum

Core m3-7Y32

2 / 4

2,697

0.0%

2,718

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

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 m3-7Y32 vs FX-4130 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 m3-7Y32 vs FX-4130: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core m3-7Y32

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 5W instead of 125W, a 121W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4130 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,697 vs 2,718).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.6 vs 27.2 PassMark/$ ($281 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).

FX-4130

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $181 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $281 MSRP).
✅Delivers 183.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 27.2 vs 9.6 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $281 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌2677.8% higher power demand at 125W vs 4.5W.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4130 better than Core m3-7Y32?

Yes. FX-4130 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.8% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-4130 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.4% 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-4130 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-4130 is the better buy right now. FX-4130 comes in $181 cheaper on MSRP at $100 MSRP versus $281 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 183.2% better value on MSRP (27.2 vs 9.6 PassMark/$), 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 m3-7Y32 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core m3-7Y32 vs FX-4130 Technical Specifications

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

Core m3-7Y32

The Core m3-7Y32 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 April 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,697 points. Launch price was $281.

FX-4130

The FX-4130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 August 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 3.9 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,718 points. Launch price was $112.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core m3-7Y32 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4130 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4130 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Core m3-7Y32 versus 3.9 GHz on the FX-4130 — a 26.1% clock advantage for the FX-4130 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core m3-7Y32 uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-4130 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core m3-7Y32 scores 2,697 against the FX-4130's 2,718 — a 0.8% lead for the FX-4130.

Feature	Core m3-7Y32	FX-4130
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.9 GHz+30%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3.8 GHz+245%
L3 Cache	4 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	4096 kB+700%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	2,697	2,718

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core m3-7Y32 uses the FCBGA1515 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4130 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core m3-7Y32	FX-4130
Socket	FCBGA1515	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core m3-7Y32 was priced at $281, while the FX-4130 came in at $100. On launch pricing ($281 vs $100), FX-4130 was $181 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core m3-7Y32 delivers 9.6 pts/$ vs 27.2 pts/$ for the FX-4130 — making the FX-4130 the 95.6% better value option.

Feature	Core m3-7Y32	FX-4130
MSRP	$281	$100-64%
Performance per Dollar	9.6	27.2+183%
Release Date	2017	2012

Search Core m3-7Y32 on Amazon

Search FX-4130 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.