Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900 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 i9-10900 is 3123 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 93% cheaper than Core i9-10900 - $21.68 vs $304.01
- Up to 92% better value when playing F1 22 than Core i9-10900 - $0.1 vs $1.21 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900
- Performs up to 12% better in F1 22 than FX-6100 - 280 vs 249 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 - 20 vs 6 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6100 doesn't have integrated graphics
F1 22
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
249
88.92857142857142%
Value, €/FPS
€0.1/FPS
100%
Price, €
€24.06
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €24.06 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 32 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
280
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.21/FPS
8.264462809917356%
Price, €
€337.45
7%
FPS Winner
Buy for €337.45 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 39 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6100 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900 |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Zambezi | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 10 |
6 | Threads | 20 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
16.5x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |