FX-8120 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

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.

FX-8120 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G 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.

FX-8120 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

FX-8120

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +19.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Costs $89 less on MSRP ($205 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).
✅Delivers 42.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.2 vs 22.7 PassMark/$ ($205 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (6,594 vs 6,661).
❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

2018

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8120 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 22.7 vs 32.2 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $205 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G better than FX-8120?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-8120 is ahead with a 19.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark. FX-8120 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, Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is still the much better call for a fresh build. Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G comes in 43.4% more expensive on MSRP at $294 MSRP versus $205 MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. FX-8120 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 42.0% better value on paper (32.2 vs 22.7 PassMark/$), 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?

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 8/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

FX-8120 vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G Technical Specifications

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

FX-8120

The FX-8120 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 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,594 points. Launch price was $149.

Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G

The Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 May 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 6,661 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-8120 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-8120 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the FX-8120 versus 3.5 GHz on the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G — a 13.3% clock advantage for the FX-8120. The FX-8120 uses the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8120 scores 6,594 against the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G's 6,661 — a 1% lead for the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G. L3 cache: 8192 kB on the FX-8120 vs 4 MB on the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G.

Feature	FX-8120	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+100%	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4 GHz+14%	3.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	—
L3 Cache	8192 kB+100%	4 MB
L2 Cache	8192 kB+300%	2 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Zambezi (2011−2012)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	6,594	6,661+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-8120 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-8120	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
Socket	AM3+	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-8120 was priced at $205, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G came in at $294. On launch pricing ($205 vs $294), FX-8120 was $89 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-8120 delivers 32.2 pts/$ vs 22.7 pts/$ for the Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G — making the FX-8120 the 34.7% better value option.

Feature	FX-8120	Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
MSRP	$205-30%	$294
Performance per Dollar	32.2+42%	22.7
Release Date	2011	2018

Search FX-8120 on Amazon

Search Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.