FX-6200 vs A10-9620P

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.60
FX-6200
2012
6 cores / 6 threads, 125 Watt
2.58
+61.3%

FX-6200 outperforms A10-9620P by an impressive 61% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-9620P and FX-6200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20911726
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesBristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency10.051.95
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)27 February 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A10-9620P and FX-6200 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads46
Base clock speed2.5 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cacheno data288 KB
L2 cache2 MB6144 KB
L3 cacheno data8192 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size250 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C61 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.3 V - Max: 1.4125 V

Compatibility

Information on A10-9620P and FX-6200 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
SocketFP4AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-9620P and FX-6200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-9620P and FX-6200 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9620P and FX-6200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-9620P and FX-6200.

PCIe versionno datan/a

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.

A10-9620P 1.60
FX-6200 2.58
+61.3%

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.

A10-9620P 2535
FX-6200 4085
+61.1%

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.

A10-9620P 503
+23%
FX-6200 409

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.

A10-9620P 1115
FX-6200 1299
+16.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.60 2.58
Recency 1 January 2017 27 February 2012
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 4 6
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

A10-9620P has an age advantage of 4 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.

FX-6200, on the other hand, has a 61.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

The FX-6200 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-9620P in performance tests.

Be aware that A10-9620P is a notebook processor while FX-6200 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-9620P and FX-6200, 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 A10-9620P
A10-9620P
AMD FX-6200
FX-6200

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.


3.3 312 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 134 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-9620P or FX-6200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.