Core i3-1110G4 vs FX-6200

Core i3-1110G4 vs FX-6200 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-1110G4

2 / 4

4,160

+1.1%

4,114

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-1110G4 vs FX-6200 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-1110G4 vs FX-6200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-1110G4

2020

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 15W instead of 125W, a 110W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics Xe G4 (48 EU), while FX-6200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6200 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).

FX-6200

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (4,114 vs 4,160).
❌Launch MSRP is still $169 MSRP, while Core i3-1110G4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌733.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 15W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-1110G4 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-1110G4 better than FX-6200?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-6200 is ahead with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-1110G4 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark. FX-6200 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-1110G4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i3-1110G4 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-1110G4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $169 MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. FX-6200 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (24.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3+.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-1110G4 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 6/6. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-1110G4 vs FX-6200 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-1110G4

The Core i3-1110G4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 September 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Tiger Lake-UP4 (2020−2021) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm SuperFin process technology. Socket: FCBGA1598. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,160 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-6200

The FX-6200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 February 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 6144 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,114 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-1110G4 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-6200 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the FX-6200 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the Core i3-1110G4 versus 4.1 GHz on the FX-6200 — a 5% clock advantage for the FX-6200 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i3-1110G4 uses the Tiger Lake-UP4 (2020−2021) architecture (10 nm SuperFin), while the FX-6200 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-1110G4 scores 4,160 against the FX-6200's 4,114 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i3-1110G4. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i3-1110G4 vs 8192 kB on the FX-6200.

Feature	Core i3-1110G4	FX-6200
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	6 / 6+200%
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz	4.1 GHz+5%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	3.8 GHz+111%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	8192 kB+33%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	6144 kB+380%
Process	10 nm SuperFin-69%	32 nm
Architecture	Tiger Lake-UP4 (2020−2021)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	4,160+1%	4,114
Geekbench 6 Single	1,491	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-1110G4 uses the FCBGA1598 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the FX-6200 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-1110G4	FX-6200
Socket	FCBGA1598	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+100%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR4x-4267	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-1110G4) / not specified (FX-6200). The Core i3-1110G4 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics Xe G4 (48 EU)), while the FX-6200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-1110G4 targets Thin & Light Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i3-1110G4 rivals Ryzen 3 4300U.