Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3930T outperforms FX-6200 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G3930T is 1772 days newer than FX-6200.
Advantages of AMD FX-6200
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930T - 6 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930T
- Performs up to 2% better in A Plague Tale: Requiem than FX-6200 - 119 vs 117 FPS
- Consumes up to 72% less energy than AMD FX-6200 - 35 vs 125 Watts
A Plague Tale: Requiem
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-6200
Desktop • Feb 27th, 2012
Celeron G3930T
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6200 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930T |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 27th, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Zambezi | Codename | Kaby Lake |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
3 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 2 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
| 4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 125 W | TDP | 35 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 19.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
