FX-6100 vs Xeon W3680

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W3680
2010
6 cores / 12 threads, 130 Watt
4.41
+90.1%
FX-6100
2011
6 cores / 6 threads, 95 Watt
2.32

Xeon W3680 outperforms FX-6100 by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W3680 and FX-6100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking13311794
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.13no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency3.212.31
Architecture codenameGulftown (2010−2011)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date16 March 2010 (14 years ago)12 October 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$350no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon W3680 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads126
Base clock speed3.33 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)288 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)6 MB
L3 cache12 MB (shared)8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size239 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,170 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W3680 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
SocketFCLGA1366AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W3680 and FX-6100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching+no data
PAE36 Bitno data

Security technologies

Xeon W3680 and FX-6100 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 Xeon W3680 and FX-6100 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W3680 and FX-6100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size24 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth32 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W3680 and FX-6100.

PCIe version2.02.0

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.

Xeon W3680 4.41
+90.1%
FX-6100 2.32

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.

Xeon W3680 7003
+89.9%
FX-6100 3688

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.

Xeon W3680 545
+42.3%
FX-6100 383

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.

Xeon W3680 2497
+103%
FX-6100 1229

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.41 2.32
Recency 16 March 2010 12 October 2011
Threads 12 6
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 95 Watt

Xeon W3680 has a 90.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

FX-6100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 36.8% lower power consumption.

The Xeon W3680 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-6100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon W3680 is a server/workstation processor while FX-6100 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W3680 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.


Intel Xeon W3680
Xeon W3680
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.


4.4 142 votes

Rate Xeon W3680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1097 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 Xeon W3680 or FX-6100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.