Core i7-2675QM vs FX-6120

CPU

GPU

Core i7-2675QM

4 Cores8 Thrd45 WWMax: 3.1 GHz2011

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-6120

6 Cores6 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.2 GHz2012

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-2675QM

4 / 8

3,913

+1.6%

3,853

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.

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 i7-2675QM

2011

Why buy it

✅+1.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 45W instead of 95W, a 50W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while FX-6120 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6120 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.4 vs 20.5 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $188 MSRP).

FX-6120

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Costs $190 less on MSRP ($188 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Delivers 98.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 20.5 vs 10.4 PassMark/$ ($188 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,853 vs 3,913).
❌111.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2675QM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-2675QM

2011

FX-6120

2012

Why buy it

✅+1.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 45W instead of 95W, a 50W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while FX-6120 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Costs $190 less on MSRP ($188 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Delivers 98.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 20.5 vs 10.4 PassMark/$ ($188 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6120 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.4 vs 20.5 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $188 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,853 vs 3,913).
❌111.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2675QM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-6120 better than Core i7-2675QM?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, FX-6120 is ahead with a 10.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2675QM pulls ahead with 1.6% better PassMark. FX-6120 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2675QM is the better fit. You are getting 1.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

FX-6120 is the smarter buy today. FX-6120 is $190 cheaper on MSRP at $188 MSRP versus $378 MSRP, and it gives you a 10.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Core i7-2675QM is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.6% better PassMark. It is also 98.0% better value on MSRP (20.5 vs 10.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

FX-6120 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-2675QM Benchmark Check

FX-6120 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
1080p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	88 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	65 FPS	65 FPS
medium	59 FPS	57 FPS
high	45 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	36 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i7-2675QM Open FX-6120

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
1080p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	87 FPS	96 FPS
high	82 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	65 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	86 FPS	96 FPS
medium	75 FPS	96 FPS
high	71 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	59 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	67 FPS	96 FPS
medium	61 FPS	96 FPS
high	48 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i7-2675QM Open FX-6120

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
1080p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i7-2675QM Open FX-6120

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
1080p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	98 FPS	96 FPS
medium	98 FPS	96 FPS
high	98 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i7-2675QM Open FX-6120

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-2675QM and FX-6120

Core i7-2675QM

The Core i7-2675QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1224. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 3,913 points. Launch price was $378.

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 i7-2675QM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the FX-6120 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the FX-6120 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Core i7-2675QM versus 4.2 GHz on the FX-6120 — a 30.1% clock advantage for the FX-6120 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i7-2675QM uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the FX-6120 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2675QM scores 3,913 against the FX-6120's 3,853 — a 1.5% lead for the Core i7-2675QM. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-2675QM vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-6120.

Feature	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 6+50%
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz	4.2 GHz+35%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	3.6 GHz+64%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	8 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	6 MB+2300%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	3,913+2%	3,853

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2675QM uses the FCBGA1224 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the FX-6120 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
Socket	FCBGA1224	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Core i7-2675QM) / not specified (FX-6120). The Core i7-2675QM includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the FX-6120 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2675QM targets Mobile.

Feature	Core i7-2675QM	FX-6120
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 3000	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x	—
Target Use	Mobile	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-2675QM launched at $378 MSRP, while the FX-6120 debuted at $188. On MSRP ($378 vs $188), the FX-6120 is $190 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-2675QM delivers 10.4 pts/$ vs 20.5 pts/$ for the FX-6120 — making the FX-6120 the 65.8% better value option.