Any difference besides clockspeed?

[Aldakoopa]

Since AMD released the FX-6200 and FX-4170 (which made me jealous, if you haven't already been able to tell from my overclock) I have been wondering is there any real difference between the 4100 and 4170 and the 6100 and 6200 besides the clockspeed? Are they essentially pre-overclocked versions of the same processor?

I was able to get my CPU to 4.2GHz on stock voltage, so is it equal in performance to a 4170 now, or is there something else that's different or more optimised? Anything at all?

 

[ssjwizard]

Nope just clockspeed. Same with the 2600k and 2700k only difference is a higher multiplier out of the box.

 

[Cigarsmoker]

Ah ain't that the beauty and intent of OCing? To get the performance of a higher price/performance CPU for a lower price.

 

[Aldakoopa]

Nope just clockspeed. Same with the 2600k and 2700k only difference is a higher multiplier out of the box.

Ok thanks. I wasn't sure since it took a few months for them to release it, I thought maybe they had improved a little more than just clockspeed.

Ah ain't that the beauty and intent of OCing? To get the performance of a higher price/performance CPU for a lower price.

I'm starting to see the light.

 

[skpwn]

I have a 6200. The highest I've taken it (on air) is to 4.4ghz...the 6100 looks like it gets about that high too, depending on motherboard.

The main difference is the number of watts it uses; The 6200 is a 125 watt chip while the 6100 is a 95 watt chip. The 6200 comes stock at x19 multiplier, so besides the wattage and clock speed, there is no difference.

 

[Aldakoopa]

I think the wattage difference you're referring to is Thermal Design Power, or TDP, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think thats a measure of the heat it generates, which by the time you overclock to the speed of the higher TDP processor, you will be generating more heat as well.