Core i5-6267U vs FX-4150

Core i5-6267U vs FX-4150 Performance Spectrum

Core i5-6267U

2 / 4

3,360

+1.0%

3,327

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 i5-6267U vs FX-4150 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 i5-6267U vs FX-4150: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i5-6267U

2015

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Iris Graphics 550, while FX-4150 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4150 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌438.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 95W.

FX-4150

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Draws 95W instead of 512W, a 417W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,327 vs 3,360).
❌Launch MSRP is still $137 MSRP, while Core i5-6267U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-6267U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4150 better than Core i5-6267U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-4150 is ahead with a 4.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-6267U pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark. FX-4150 also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-6267U is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-4150 is the better buy right now. FX-4150 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $137 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i5-6267U is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (24.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i5-6267U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2012) 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 i5-6267U vs FX-4150 Technical Specifications

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

Core i5-6267U

The Core i5-6267U 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 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,360 points. Launch price was $304.

FX-4150

The FX-4150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,327 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-6267U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4150 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Core i5-6267U versus 4 GHz on the FX-4150 — a 19.2% clock advantage for the FX-4150 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-6267U uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-4150 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-6267U scores 3,360 against the FX-4150's 3,327 — a 1% lead for the Core i5-6267U. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Core i5-6267U vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-4150.

Feature	Core i5-6267U	FX-4150
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz	4 GHz+21%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.8 GHz+31%
L3 Cache	4 MB	8 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	512 kB	4 MB+700%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	3,360	3,327

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-6267U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4150 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-6267U	FX-4150
Socket	BGA1356	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-6267U) / not specified (FX-4150). The Core i5-6267U includes integrated graphics (Iris Graphics 550), while the FX-4150 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-6267U targets Mobile.