Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12400F outperforms the cheaper FX-6100 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6100 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-12400F is 3737 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-12400F
- Performs up to 23% better in Battlefield IV than FX-6100 - 453 vs 367 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-6100 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6100 - 12 vs 6 threads
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 73% cheaper than Core i5-12400F - $29.65 vs $111.34
- Up to 68% better value when playing Battlefield IV than Core i5-12400F - $0.08 vs $0.25 per FPS
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
FPS
453
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.25/FPS
32%
Price, $
$111.34
26%
FPS Winner
Buy for $111.34 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 36 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
367
81.01545253863135%
Value, $/FPS
$0.08/FPS
100%
Price, $
$29.65
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $29.65 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 34 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-12400F | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Alder Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
12 | Threads | 6 |
2.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
25.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |