The Celeron G4900 is a clear winner – it's at least 2x faster gaming CPU than the FX-6100 and it's also a better value for money, as it's $0.66 cheaper!
Advantages of the Celeron G4900
- At least 2x faster CPU for gaming
- Up to 2% cheaper – $28.99 vs $29.65
- A better value for money for gaming
- Consumes up to 43% less energy – 54 vs 95 Watts
Advantages of the FX-6100
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 6 vs 2 threads
Celeron G4900 vs FX-6100 for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Celeron G4900
Apr 3rd, 2018
Average FPS
170
100%
Min 1% FPS
114
100%
Price, $
$28.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.17/FPS
100%
Celeron G4900 vs FX-6100 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G4900 vs FX-6100 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G4900 vs FX-6100 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G4900
Apr 3rd, 2018
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
3.1 GHz
94%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
FX-6100
Oct 12th, 2011
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Celeron G4900 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | FX-6100 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 3rd, 2018 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
| $42.00 | MSRP | Not Available |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
| Coffee Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
54 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Performance | ||
| 2 | Cores | 6 |
| 2 | Threads | 6 |
| 3.1 GHz | Base Frequency | 3.3 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Frequency | 3.6 GHz |
| 2 MB | L3 Cache | 8 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR4 @ 2400 MHz | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
