In Atomfall, the Celeron 3205U is slightly slower than the FX-6100. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron 3205U
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer – Mar 01, 2015 vs Oct 12, 2011
- Is 3 years and 4 months newer
- Consumes up to 84% less energy – 15 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 84% less energy
FX-6100
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall – 187 vs 184 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Celeron 3205U vs FX-6100: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
FX-6100
Oct 12th, 2011
Average FPS
187 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$33.9
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.18/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron 3205U vs FX-6100 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron 3205U vs FX-6100 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron 3205U
Mar 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
1.5 GHz
45%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1600 MHz
100%
FX-6100
Oct 12th, 2011
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron 3205U Mar 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6100 Oct 12th, 2011 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
| $107.00 | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | AM3+ |
15W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1600 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
