Key Differences
In short — Celeron G6900 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 Celeron G6900 is 3737 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G6900
- Performs up to 17% better in Assassin's Creed Odyssey than FX-6100 - 135 vs 115 FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 29% cheaper than Celeron G6900 - CA$80.8 vs CA$113.5
- Up to 17% better value when playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey than Celeron G6900 - CA$0.7 vs CA$0.84 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G6900 - 6 vs 2 threads
Assassin's Creed Odyssey
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
FPS
135
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.84/FPS
83%
Price, CA$
CA$113.5
71%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$113.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 78248 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
115
85%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.7/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$80.8
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$80.8 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 78249 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron G6900 | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Celeron | Collection | FX |
Alder Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 6 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
Not Available | TDP | 95 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
UHD Graphics 710 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |