Core i5-6260U vs FX-4350

Core i5-6260U vs FX-4350 Performance Spectrum

Core i5-6260U

2 / 4

3,200

+0.5%

3,184

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 i5-6260U vs FX-4350 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 i5-6260U vs FX-4350: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i5-6260U

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Iris Graphics 540, while FX-4350 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4350 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌309.6% higher power demand at 512W vs 125W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-4350.

FX-4350

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 125W instead of 512W, a 387W reduction.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 12) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i5-6260U.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,184 vs 3,200).
❌Launch MSRP is still $122 MSRP, while Core i5-6260U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-6260U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4350 better than Core i5-6260U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-4350 is ahead with a 13.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-6260U pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-6260U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-4350 is the better buy right now. FX-4350 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $122 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i5-6260U is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.5% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (26.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i5-6260U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i5-6260U vs FX-4350 Technical Specifications

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

Core i5-6260U

The Core i5-6260U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,200 points. Launch price was $304.

FX-4350

The FX-4350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,184 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-6260U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4350 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4350 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Core i5-6260U versus 4.3 GHz on the FX-4350 — a 38.9% clock advantage for the FX-4350 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The Core i5-6260U uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-4350 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-6260U scores 3,200 against the FX-4350's 3,184 — a 0.5% lead for the Core i5-6260U. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 979 vs 504, a 64.1% lead for the Core i5-6260U that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	Core i5-6260U	FX-4350
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz	4.3 GHz+48%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	4.2 GHz+133%
L3 Cache	4 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	4096 kB+700%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	3,200	3,184
Geekbench 6 Single	979+94%	504
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,289

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-6260U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4350 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the Core i5-6260U versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-4350 — the Core i5-6260U supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 12 (Core i5-6260U) vs 16 (FX-4350) — the FX-4350 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Skylake-U (Core i5-6260U) and AMD 970,990X,990FX (FX-4350).

Feature	Core i5-6260U	FX-4350
Socket	BGA1356	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+14%	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	12	16+33%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the FX-4350 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-6260U) vs AMD-V (FX-4350). The Core i5-6260U includes integrated graphics (Iris Graphics 540), while the FX-4350 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-6260U targets Mainstream Laptop, FX-4350 targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-6260U rivals A12-9720P.