Core 2 Quad Q9300 vs FX-6200
Aggregate performance score
FX-6200 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1636 | 2198 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.63 | 2.00 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Zambezi (2011−2012) | Yorkfield (2007−2009) |
| Release date | 27 February 2012 (12 years ago) | March 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Current price | $38 | $76 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 2 Quad Q9300 has 217% better value for money than FX-6200.
Detailed specifications
FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 cores | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 288 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6144 KB | 6 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 2x 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 61 °C | 71 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 456 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.3 V - Max: 1.4125 V | no data |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.85V-1.3625V |
Compatibility
Information on FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3+ | LGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 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 FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300.
| PCIe version | n/a | no data |
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.
FX-6200 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
FX-6200 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by 108% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
FX-6200 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by 31% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
FX-6200 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9300 by 51% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.65 | 1.27 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 4 |
| Threads | 6 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 95 Watt |
The FX-6200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9300 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-6200 and Core 2 Quad Q9300, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
