Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10400F outperforms the cheaper FX-6100 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6100 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-10400F is 3123 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 36% cheaper than Core i5-10400F - CA$98.43 vs CA$155.0
- Up to 18% better value when playing Rust than Core i5-10400F - CA$0.65 vs CA$0.79 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Performs up to 30% better in Rust than FX-6100 - 197 vs 151 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-6100 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6100 - 12 vs 6 threads
Rust
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
151
76%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.65/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$98.43
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$98.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 80 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
197
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.79/FPS
82%
Price, CA$
CA$155
63%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$155 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 81 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6100 | vs | Intel Core i5-10400F |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Zambezi | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
6 | Threads | 12 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
16.5x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |