Core i3-4360 vs FX-6100

Core i3-4360 vs FX-6100 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4360

2 / 4

3,639

0.0%

3,686

+1.3%

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 i3-4360 vs FX-6100 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 i3-4360 vs FX-6100: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-4360

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 54W instead of 95W, a 41W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, while FX-6100 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike FX-6100.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,639 vs 3,686).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).

FX-6100

2011

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $165 MSRP, while Core i3-4360 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌75.9% higher power demand at 95W vs 54W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4360 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i3-4360.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-6100 better than Core i3-4360?

Yes. FX-6100 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-6100 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-6100 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 6 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

FX-6100 is the better buy right now. FX-6100 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $165 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (22.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-4360 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4360 vs FX-6100 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4360

The Core i3-4360 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,639 points. Launch price was $352.

FX-6100

The FX-6100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,686 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4360 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-6100 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the FX-6100 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Core i3-4360 versus 3.9 GHz on the FX-6100 — a 5.3% clock advantage for the FX-6100 (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i3-4360 uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-6100 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4360 scores 3,639 against the FX-6100's 3,686 — a 1.3% lead for the FX-6100. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4360 vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-6100.

Feature	Core i3-4360	FX-6100
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	6 / 6+200%
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz	3.9 GHz+5%
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+12%	3.3 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	8 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	6 MB+2300%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	3,639	3,686+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,128	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4360 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-6100 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4360	FX-6100
Socket	LGA1150	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Core i3-4360) / not specified (FX-6100). The Core i3-4360 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the FX-6100 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4360 targets Mainstream Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i3-4360 rivals Core i3-6100.