Key Differences
In short — Core i5-6400 outperforms the cheaper FX-8120 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8120 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-6400 is 1359 days newer than the cheaper FX-8120.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-6400
- Performs up to 5% better in PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds than FX-8120 - 287 vs 273 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-8120 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8120 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8120
- Up to 22% cheaper than Core i5-6400 - $78.02 vs $99.95
- Up to 17% better value when playing PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds than Core i5-6400 - $0.29 vs $0.35 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-6400 - 8 vs 4 threads
PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
FPS
287
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.35/FPS
82.85714285714285%
Price, $
$99.95
78%
FPS Winner
Buy for $99.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349631 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
273
95.1219512195122%
Value, $/FPS
$0.29/FPS
100%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $78.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349630 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-6400 | vs | AMD FX-8120 |
---|---|---|
Jul 2nd, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Skylake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
4 | Threads | 8 |
2.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
3.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
27.0x | Multiplier | 15.5x |
HD Graphics 530 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |