FX-6120 vs Celeron M 360

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 360
1 core / 1 thread, 21 Watt
0.14
FX-6120
2012
6 cores / 6 threads, 95 Watt
2.45
+1650%

FX-6120 outperforms Celeron M 360 by a whopping 1650% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 360 and FX-6120 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking33191753
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Power efficiency0.632.44
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)23 October 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 360 and FX-6120 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 cores1 (Single-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads16
Base clock speed1.4 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz4.2 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data288 KB
L2 cacheno data6 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data315 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data1,200 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range1.26V, 1.004V-1.292Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 360 and FX-6120 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 configurationno data1
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA479AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 360 and FX-6120. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 360 and FX-6120 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 360 and FX-6120 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 360 and FX-6120. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 360 and FX-6120.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

Celeron M 360 0.14
FX-6120 2.45
+1650%

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.

Celeron M 360 221
FX-6120 3899
+1664%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 2.45
Physical cores 1 6
Threads 1 6
Chip lithography 90 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 95 Watt

Celeron M 360 has 352.4% lower power consumption.

FX-6120, on the other hand, has a 1650% higher aggregate performance score, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.

The FX-6120 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 360 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron M 360 is a notebook processor while FX-6120 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 360 and FX-6120, 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.


Intel Celeron M 360
Celeron M 360
AMD FX-6120
FX-6120

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.


2.8 12 votes

Rate Celeron M 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 35 votes

Rate FX-6120 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 360 or FX-6120, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.