Page Index

FX-6120 vs Xeon E5-2603 v3

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

FX-6120

6 Cores6 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.2 GHz2012

Popular choices:

•••••••••
VS
Intel

Xeon E5-2603 v3

6 Cores6 Thrd85 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2014

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

FX-6120
6 / 6
3,853
+0.7%
brand logoAthlon II X4 631
brand logoFX-7600P
brand logoFX-4300
brand logoAthlon X4 860K
brand logoRyzen 7 7735HS
brand logoRyzen AI Max 390
brand logoRyzen 9 9955HX3D
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Xeon E5-2603 v3
6 / 6
3,825
0.0%
brand logoCore 2 Duo P7350
brand logoPentium G4400
brand logoAtom x5-Z8350
brand logoCore i7-960
brand logoCore i5-12600HE
brand logoCore i9-13900HX
brand logoXeon w7-3465X
brand logoXeon w9-3575X

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.

FX-6120

2012

Why buy it

  • ✅Better for gaming: +7.5% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 15 MB).
  • ❌Launch MSRP is still $188 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2603 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-2603 v3

2014

Why buy it

  • ✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).
  • ✅Draws 85W instead of 95W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-6120 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • ❌Lower PassMark (3,825 vs 3,853).

Quick Answers

So, is FX-6120 better than Xeon E5-2603 v3?
Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2603 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-6120 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.
Which one is better for gaming?
If gaming is the priority, FX-6120 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 7.5% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-6120 is the better fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 6 threads.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
FX-6120 is the smarter buy today. FX-6120 is at an unclear MSRP at $188 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 7.5% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (20.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?
Xeon E5-2603 v3 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2012) and 87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

PresetFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
1080p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS90 FPS
1440p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high94 FPS89 FPS
ultra78 FPS72 FPS
4K
low65 FPS62 FPS
medium57 FPS56 FPS
high45 FPS44 FPS
ultra36 FPS35 FPS
Open FX-6120Open Xeon E5-2603 v3
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
1080p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS76 FPS
1440p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS92 FPS
high96 FPS85 FPS
ultra96 FPS69 FPS
4K
low96 FPS82 FPS
medium96 FPS73 FPS
high96 FPS64 FPS
ultra96 FPS47 FPS
Open FX-6120Open Xeon E5-2603 v3
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
1080p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
1440p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
4K
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
Open FX-6120Open Xeon E5-2603 v3
Valorant

Valorant

PresetFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
1080p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
1440p
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
4K
low96 FPS96 FPS
medium96 FPS96 FPS
high96 FPS96 FPS
ultra96 FPS96 FPS
Open FX-6120Open Xeon E5-2603 v3
Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of FX-6120 and Xeon E5-2603 v3

AMD

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.

Intel

Xeon E5-2603 v3

The Xeon E5-2603 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,825 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the FX-6120 and Xeon E5-2603 v3 share an identical 6-core/6-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the FX-6120 versus 1.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2603 v3 — a 89.7% clock advantage for the FX-6120 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The FX-6120 uses the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5-2603 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the FX-6120 scores 3,853 against the Xeon E5-2603 v3's 3,825 — a 0.7% lead for the FX-6120. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the FX-6120 vs 15 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2603 v3.

FeatureFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
Cores / Threads
6 / 6
6 / 6
Boost Clock
4.2 GHz+163%
1.6 GHz
Base Clock
3.6 GHz+125%
1.6 GHz
L3 Cache
8 MB (total)
15 MB (total)+88%
L2 Cache
6 MB+2300%
256K (per core)
Process
32 nm
22 nm-31%
Architecture
Zambezi (2011−2012)
Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark
3,853
3,825
🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-6120 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5-2603 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureFX-6120Xeon E5-2603 v3
Socket
AM3+
LGA2011
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%