FX-6100 vs FX-8350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8350
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.84
+61.3%

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and FX-6100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking13901701
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.142.99
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD FX-Series (Desktop)no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)12 October 2011 (12 years ago)
Current price$162 $39

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

FX-6100 has 162% better value for money than FX-8350.

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 and FX-6100 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads86
Base clock speed4 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cacheno data288 KB
L2 cache8192 KB6 MB
L3 cacheno data8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesYes
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8350 and FX-6100 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+AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and FX-6100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Core, HT3.1no data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and FX-6100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and FX-6100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and FX-6100.

PCIe versionn/a2.0

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.

FX-8350 3.84
+61.3%
FX-6100 2.38

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by 61% 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-8350 5936
+61.2%
FX-6100 3682

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by 61% 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-8350 489
+27%
FX-6100 385

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by 27% 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-8350 1993
+61.5%
FX-6100 1234

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by 62% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

3DMark Fire Strike Physics

Benchmark coverage: 4%

FX-8350 7380
+72.8%
FX-6100 4270

FX-8350 outperforms FX-6100 by 73% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.84 2.38
Recency 23 October 2012 12 October 2011
Physical cores 8 6
Threads 8 6
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt

The FX-8350 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-6100 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 and FX-6100, 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-8350
FX-8350
AMD FX-6100
FX-6100

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 3433 votes

Rate FX-8350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 1012 votes

Rate FX-6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8350 or FX-6100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.