Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11400F 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 i5-11400F is 3443 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11400F
- Performs up to 13% better in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than FX-6100 - 213 vs 189 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
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 58% cheaper than Core i5-11400F - CA$82.49 vs CA$196.23
- Up to 52% better value when playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Core i5-11400F - CA$0.44 vs CA$0.92 per FPS
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
213
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.92/FPS
47%
Price, CA$
CA$196.23
42%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$196.23 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
189
88%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.44/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$82.49
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$82.49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-11400F | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Rocket Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
12 | Threads | 6 |
2.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
26.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |