Key Differences
In short — Celeron G4900 outperforms the cheaper FX-6200 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6200 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Celeron G4900 is 2227 days newer than the cheaper FX-6200.
Advantages of AMD FX-6200
- Up to 29% cheaper than Celeron G4900 - €42.6 vs €60.24
- Up to 30% better value when playing God of War than Celeron G4900 - €0.26 vs €0.37 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Performs up to 1% better in God of War than FX-6200 - 164 vs 162 FPS
- Consumes up to 57% less energy than AMD FX-6200 - 54 vs 125 Watts
God of War
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €42.6 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 132 minutes ago
Buy for €60.24 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 132 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Feb 27th, 2012
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6200 | vs | Intel Celeron G4900 |
---|---|---|
Feb 27th, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 3rd, 2018 |
FX | Collection | Celeron |
Zambezi | Codename | Coffee Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
3 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 54 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
19.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |