In Atomfall, the Core i7-620M is slightly slower than the FX-6300. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i7-620M
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 35 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
FX-6300
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 186 vs 185 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
- Is 2 years and 9 months newer – Oct 23, 2012 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 2 years and 9 months newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i7-620M vs FX-6300: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
186 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$40.65
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-620M vs FX-6300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-620M vs FX-6300 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-620M
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.677 GHz
76%
Turbo Frequency
3.333 GHz
81%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
57%
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-620M Jan 7th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 7th, 2010 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| $332.00 | MSRP | $132.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1288 | Socket | AM3+ |
35W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1066 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| HD Graphics (Ironlake) | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
