In Rust, the Celeron G6900 is slightly faster than the FX-6200. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $63 more expensive!
Celeron G6900
- Up to 10% faster in Rust – 228 vs 208 FPS
- Up to 10% faster in Rust
- Is 9 years and 10 months newer – Jan 04, 2022 vs Feb 27, 2012
- Is 9 years and 10 months newer
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 46 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
FX-6200
- Up to 66% cheaper – $32.97 vs $95.82
- Up to 66% cheaper
- Up to 64% better value in Rust – $0.15 vs $0.42/FPS
- Up to 64% better value in Rust
Rust FPS Calculator
Celeron G6900 vs FX-6200: Comparison of performance and price
Celeron G6900
Jan 4th, 2022
Average FPS
228 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
56 FPS
100%
Price, $
$95.82
34%
Value, $/FPS
$0.42/FPS
36%
FX-6200
Feb 27th, 2012
Average FPS
208 FPS
91%
Min 1% FPS
40 FPS
71%
Price, $
$32.97
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.15/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G6900 vs FX-6200 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G6900 vs FX-6200 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G6900
Jan 4th, 2022
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
FX-6200
Feb 27th, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G6900 Jan 4th, 2022 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6200 Feb 27th, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Feb 27th, 2012 |
| $52.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1700 | Socket | AM3+ |
46W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| 3200 MHz (DDR4), 4800 MHz (DDR5) | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 710 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
