In Deathloop, the FX-6350 is slightly slower than the Ryzen 9 7900. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $358 cheaper!
FX-6350
- Up to 87% cheaper – $51.29 vs $409.25
- Up to 87% cheaper
- Up to 86% better value in Deathloop – $0.23 vs $1.70/FPS
- Up to 86% better value in Deathloop
Ryzen 9 7900
- Up to 8% faster in Deathloop – 240 vs 222 FPS
- Up to 8% faster in Deathloop
- Is 9 years and 8 months newer – Jan 14, 2023 vs Apr 29, 2013
- Is 9 years and 8 months newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
Deathloop FPS Calculator
FX-6350 vs Ryzen 9 7900: Comparison of performance and price
FX-6350
Apr 29th, 2013
Average FPS
222 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
92%
Price, $
$51.29
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.23/FPS
100%
Ryzen 9 7900
Jan 14th, 2023
Average FPS
240 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
180 FPS
100%
Price, $
$409.25
12%
Value, $/FPS
$1.7/FPS
14%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-6350 vs Ryzen 9 7900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-6350 vs Ryzen 9 7900 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-6350
Apr 29th, 2013
Cores
6-core
50%
L3 Cache
8 MB
12%
Base Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.2 GHz
78%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen 9 7900
Jan 14th, 2023
Cores
12-core
100%
L3 Cache
64 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
95%
Turbo Frequency
5.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5200 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-6350 Apr 29th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen 9 7900 Jan 14th, 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Apr 29th, 2013 | Release Date | Jan 14th, 2023 |
| – | MSRP | $429.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | AM5 |
| 125W | Power Consumption | 65W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 5200 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | Radeon Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
