In Atomfall, the Core i3-10105 is slightly faster than the FX-6200. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $102 more expensive!
Core i3-10105
- Up to 12% faster in Atomfall – 210 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 12% faster in Atomfall
- Is 9 years and 17 days newer – Mar 16, 2021 vs Feb 27, 2012
- Is 9 years and 17 days newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
FX-6200
- Up to 76% cheaper – $32.97 vs $134.94
- Up to 76% cheaper
- Up to 73% better value in Atomfall – $0.17 vs $0.64/FPS
- Up to 73% better value in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-10105 vs FX-6200: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Average FPS
210 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
157 FPS
100%
Price, $
$134.94
24%
Value, $/FPS
$0.64/FPS
27%
FX-6200
Feb 27th, 2012
Average FPS
187 FPS
89%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
89%
Price, $
$32.97
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.17/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-10105 vs FX-6200 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-10105 vs FX-6200 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-10105
Mar 16th, 2021
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
6 MB
75%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
97%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 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
93%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-10105 Mar 16th, 2021 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6200 Feb 27th, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Feb 27th, 2012 |
| $122.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1200 | Socket | AM3+ |
65W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
