Ryzen 9 6900HX vs FX-4300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4300
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.88
Ryzen 9 6900HX
2022
8 cores / 16 threads, 45 Watt
15.59
+729%

Ryzen 9 6900HX outperforms FX-4300 by a whopping 729% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1973437
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Rembrandt (Zen 3+)
Power efficiency1.8732.79
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Rembrandt-H (Zen 3+) (2022)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads416
Base clock speed3.8 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4.9 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm6 nm
Die size315 mm2208 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C95 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX 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+FP7
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)AMD Radeon 680M ( - 2400 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX.

PCIe versionn/a4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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-4300 1.88
Ryzen 9 6900HX 15.59
+729%

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.

FX-4300 2982
Ryzen 9 6900HX 24766
+731%

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.

FX-4300 454
Ryzen 9 6900HX 1998
+340%

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.

FX-4300 1104
Ryzen 9 6900HX 9677
+777%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.88 15.59
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 16
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 45 Watt

Ryzen 9 6900HX has a 729.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 433.3% more advanced lithography process, and 111.1% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 6900HX is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4300 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while Ryzen 9 6900HX is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and Ryzen 9 6900HX, 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-4300
FX-4300
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
Ryzen 9 6900HX

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.


3.8 1732 votes

Rate FX-4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 461 vote

Rate Ryzen 9 6900HX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or Ryzen 9 6900HX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.