Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12500 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 i5-12500 is 3737 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-12500
- Performs up to 3% better in Control than FX-6100 - 205 vs 199 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
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 60% cheaper than Core i5-12500 - CA$98.43 vs CA$249.0
- Up to 60% better value when playing Control than Core i5-12500 - CA$0.49 vs CA$1.21 per FPS
Control
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
FPS
205
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.21/FPS
40%
Price, CA$
CA$249
39%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$249 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 156 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
199
97%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.49/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$98.43
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$98.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 156 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-12500 | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Alder Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
12 | Threads | 6 |
3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
30.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |