Core i7-4600M vs FX-7500

Core i7-4600M vs FX-7500 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-4600M

2 / 4

3,204

0.0%

3,209

+0.2%

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 i7-4600M vs FX-7500 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 i7-4600M vs FX-7500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-4600M

2013

Why buy it

✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,204 vs 3,209).
❌2594.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 19W.

FX-7500

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 19W instead of 512W, a 493W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Core i7-4600M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-7500 better than Core i7-4600M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-4600M is ahead with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, FX-7500 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-7500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-7500 is the better buy right now. FX-7500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $100 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i7-4600M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (32.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

FX-7500 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-4600M vs FX-7500 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-4600M

The Core i7-4600M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,204 points. Launch price was $346.

FX-7500

The FX-7500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 June 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 19 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,209 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-4600M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-7500 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-7500 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-4600M versus 3.3 GHz on the FX-7500 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-4600M (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i7-4600M uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-7500 uses Kaveri (2014−2015) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4600M scores 3,204 against the FX-7500's 3,209 — a 0.2% lead for the FX-7500.

Feature	Core i7-4600M	FX-7500
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.6 GHz+9%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+38%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Kaveri (2014−2015)
PassMark	3,204	3,209
Cinebench R23 Multi	656	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,025	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	2,132	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4600M uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-7500 uses FP3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L 1600 MHz memory speed. The Core i7-4600M supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-4600M) vs 8 (FX-7500) — the Core i7-4600M offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i7-4600M	FX-7500
Socket	PGA946	FP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L 1600 MHz	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+100%	8

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-4600M) vs AMD-V (FX-7500). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 4600 (Core i7-4600M) and Radeon R7 (FX-7500) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-4600M targets Mobile, FX-7500 targets Mobile.