In Deathloop, the FX-8350 is slightly slower than the FX-6100 and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $224 more expensive!
FX-8350
- Is 1 year and 11 days newer – Oct 23, 2012 vs Oct 12, 2011
- Is 1 year and 11 days newer
FX-6100
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 224 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Up to 87% cheaper – $33.90 vs $258.02
- Up to 87% cheaper
- Up to 87% better value in Deathloop – $0.15 vs $1.16/FPS
- Up to 87% better value in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 24% less energy – 95 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 24% less energy
Deathloop FPS Calculator
FX-8350 vs FX-6100: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8350
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
221 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
99%
Price, $
$258.02
13%
Value, $/FPS
$1.16/FPS
13%
FX-6100
Oct 12th, 2011
Average FPS
224 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
168 FPS
100%
Price, $
$33.9
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.15/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8350 vs FX-6100 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8350 vs FX-6100 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8350
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
FX-6100
Oct 12th, 2011
Cores
6-core
75%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
82%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
93%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8350 Oct 23rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6100 Oct 12th, 2011 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
| $199.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | AM3+ |
| 125W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
