FX-6200 vs A4-4000

VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-4000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.72
FX-6200
2012
6 cores / 6 threads, 125 Watt
2.57
+257%

FX-6200 outperforms A4-4000 by a whopping 257% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-4000 and FX-6200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26841726
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.051.95
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)27 February 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-4000 and FX-6200 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads26
Base clock speed3 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)288 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)6144 KB
L3 cache0 KB8192 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size246 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data61 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)70 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.3 V - Max: 1.4125 V

Compatibility

Information on A4-4000 and FX-6200 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFM2AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-4000 and FX-6200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-4000 and FX-6200 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-4000 and FX-6200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 7480Dno data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-4000 and FX-6200.

PCIe versionno datan/a

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A4-4000 0.72
FX-6200 2.57
+257%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A4-4000 1146
FX-6200 4085
+256%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A4-4000 330
FX-6200 409
+23.9%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A4-4000 464
FX-6200 1299
+180%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 2.57
Recency 1 June 2013 27 February 2012
Physical cores 2 6
Threads 2 6
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 125 Watt

A4-4000 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 92.3% lower power consumption.

FX-6200, on the other hand, has a 256.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.

The FX-6200 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-4000 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-4000 and FX-6200, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A4-4000
A4-4000
AMD FX-6200
FX-6200

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 358 votes

Rate A4-4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 134 votes

Rate FX-6200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-4000 or FX-6200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.