Key Differences
In short — Core i3-9100F 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 i3-9100F is 2750 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-9100F
- Performs up to 13% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-6100 - 187 vs 166 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-6100 - 65 vs 95 Watts
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 68% cheaper than Core i3-9100F - £35.24 vs £108.88
- Up to 64% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i3-9100F - £0.21 vs £0.58 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-9100F - 6 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
FPS
187
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.58/FPS
36%
Price, £
£108.88
32%
FPS Winner
Buy for £108.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 17 minutes ago
Buy for £35.24 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 16 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-9100F | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i3 | Collection | FX |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
4 | Threads | 6 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |