Key Differences
In short — Celeron G4900 outperforms FX-6100 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G4900 is 2365 days newer than FX-6100.
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Performs up to 0% better in Mass Effect: Andromeda than FX-6100 - 207 vs 206 FPS
- Consumes up to 43% less energy than AMD FX-6100 - 54 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Mass Effect: Andromeda
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-6100
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Celeron G4900
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6100 | vs | Intel Celeron G4900 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 3rd, 2018 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Zambezi | Codename | Coffee Lake |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
| 3.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 95 W | TDP | 54 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 16.5x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
