
Core i3-10110U
Popular choices:

FX-6120
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i3-10110U
2019Why buy it
- ✅Draws 25W instead of 95W, a 70W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics for 10th Gen, while FX-6120 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6120 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,839 vs 3,853).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
FX-6120
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $188 MSRP, while Core i3-10110U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌280% higher power demand at 95W vs 25W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-10110U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i3-10110U
2019FX-6120
2012Why buy it
- ✅Draws 25W instead of 95W, a 70W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics for 10th Gen, while FX-6120 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6120 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,839 vs 3,853).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $188 MSRP, while Core i3-10110U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌280% higher power demand at 95W vs 25W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-10110U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is FX-6120 better than Core i3-10110U?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 89 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 70 FPS | 78 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 69 FPS | 65 FPS |
| medium | 57 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 45 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 36 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 88 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 67 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 84 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 72 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 68 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 59 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 53 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 32 FPS | 96 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 96 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i3-10110U and FX-6120

Core i3-10110U
Core i3-10110U
The Core i3-10110U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1528. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,839 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-6120
FX-6120
The FX-6120 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 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 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: 3,853 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Core i3-10110U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-6120 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the FX-6120 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the Core i3-10110U versus 4.2 GHz on the FX-6120 — a 2.4% clock advantage for the FX-6120 (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i3-10110U uses the Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-6120 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10110U scores 3,839 against the FX-6120's 3,853 — a 0.4% lead for the FX-6120. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-10110U vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-6120.
| Feature | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 6 / 6+200% |
| Boost Clock | 4.1 GHz | 4.2 GHz+2% |
| Base Clock | 2.1 GHz | 3.6 GHz+71% |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB (total) | 8 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 6 MB+2300% |
| Process | 14 nm-56% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) | Zambezi (2011−2012) |
| PassMark | 3,839 | 3,853 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 2,327 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,270 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 2,353 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i3-10110U uses the FCBGA1528 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-6120 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1528 | AM3+ |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 64 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-10110U) / not specified (FX-6120). The Core i3-10110U includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics for 10th Gen), while the FX-6120 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-10110U targets Productivity. Direct competitor: Core i3-10110U rivals Ryzen 3 3200U.
| Feature | Core i3-10110U | FX-6120 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics for 10th Gen | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | — |
| Target Use | Productivity | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













