Ryzen 5 7600X vs FX-6200

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX-6200
2012
6 cores / 6 threads
2.65

Ryzen 5 7600X outperforms FX-6200 by 597% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1611288
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.6344.24
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataAMD Ryzen 5
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Raphael (Zen4)
Release date27 February 2012 (12 years ago)27 September 2022 (1 year ago)
Current price$38 $353

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 7600X has 6922% better value for money than FX-6200.

Detailed specifications

FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads612
Base clock speed3.8 GHz4.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz5.3 GHz
L1 cache288 KB384 KB
L2 cache6144 KB6 MB
L3 cache8192 KB32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm5 nm
Die size315 mm270 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °C95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data61 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionCCD: 6,5 Mrd + IOD: 3,4 Mrd Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesYes
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.3 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X 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
SocketAM3+AM5
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data5 nm, 0.650 - 1.475V
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-5200
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X.

PCIe versionn/a5.0
PCI Express lanesno data24

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 2.65
Ryzen 5 7600X 18.46
+597%

Ryzen 5 7600X outperforms FX-6200 by 597% based on our aggregated 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 4105
Ryzen 5 7600X 28560
+596%

Ryzen 5 7600X outperforms FX-6200 by 596% 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 412
Ryzen 5 7600X 2867
+596%

Ryzen 5 7600X outperforms FX-6200 by 596% 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 1304
Ryzen 5 7600X 12827
+884%

Ryzen 5 7600X outperforms FX-6200 by 884% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.65 18.46
Recency 27 February 2012 27 September 2022
Threads 6 12
Chip lithography 32 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 105 Watt

The Ryzen 5 7600X is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-6200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-6200 and Ryzen 5 7600X, 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 FX-6200
FX-6200
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
Ryzen 5 7600X

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.


4.2 123 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1576 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 7600X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-6200 or Ryzen 5 7600X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.