fx 6300 or i3 3220 ?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

praveen77

Distinguished
May 8, 2012
66
0
18,630
Hello guys, my configuration as of now is,
intel core 2 duo e7500 2.93 ghz,
zotac gtx 550 ti,
2 gb ram,
intel dg41rq motherboard,
corsair cx600.
I'm going to upgrade my cpu and motherboard as soon as I receive my salary this month. I've been looking at i3 3220 and fx 6300. Prices of both these products are almost identical in India. I have seen many forums where most of the people preferred fx 6300 because it is a six core etc., I'm mainly looking at gaming performance. Which of the two processors would be better ? I'm not going to overclock any of the two cpus. Even I was leaning towards fx until I saw this link : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427-4.html

so pls use your expertise to suggest me the better processor. I'm going to order the cpu after your suggestions. Thank you
 
Solution
PC-GIRL88
And dont listen to people when they say "intel is better", or "get i5 its better" sure it IS BETTER but you will never notice..... on almost every benchmark between intel and amd intel wins but the amd STILL gives over playable frame rates..... If both play game son ultra settings with playable fps who the hell cares which is better save money and go amd.

I got a fx 6300 for $119 and i play every game iv put in my pc so far or downloaded at ultra settings with 0 problems. So why exactly should i of gotten the better i5 for $220????? I see no reason to waste the money on something cuz its "better" if both will get the job done you will most likely never see the added performance a intel will give you.

Think of it like this if the...
Sort by date Sort by votes
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


Get the i3. To put it in simple terms:

The i3: Two strong cores

The FX-6100: Six weak cores
(There's more to it but it gets harder to explain)

Yeah in gaming and everyday use the i3 is a better choice.
I highly regret buying my FX-4100, I've outgrown it and I"m stuck with an amd motherboard:(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
unreal9400

unreal9400

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2012
1,913
0
20,460
Why not i5 instead?
Moving from a core 2 duo to a dual core i3 is not such a big upgrade.
For example, I jump from a Pentium 4 single core to a Quad Core i7 with hyper threading.
Now that is called a big upgrade and worth the money.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460
I would go FX6300 over the i3 any day. They currently trade blows but with the new consoles and general trend in computing the FX6300 will only get better than the i3in newer games. And with the AMD Turbo clocking up, the faster intel cores really aren;t that much faster in single/dual threaded apps.

I5's are a good choice if your budget can handle it.

The FX6300 can not only OC but is cheaper to boot
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/amd-cpu-fd6300wmhkbox
http://pcpartpicker.com/part/intel-cpu-bx80637i33220

Here are some benchmarks to back me up
http://www.techspot.com/review/586-amd-fx-8350-fx-6300/page6.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/fx-8350-8320-6300-4300.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5
http://www.techspot.com/review/689-company-of-heroes-2-performance/page4.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/670-metro-last-light-performance/page6.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/648-simcity-performance/page4.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page5.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page6.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/615-far-cry-3-performance/page6.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/601-black-ops-2-performance/page5.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


Yeah the AMD cpu optimisation for next gen games is a good point. But you can't really predict the future with PC's. I I would guess that is would about year after the new consoles come out until developers start to take advantage of the multicore/multithreading architecture AMD has right now.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


I've updated my post with some benches of recent games and seems like the FX6300 is at least as good as the i3 in most cases already and set to only get better :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


Yeah, pretty solid point. If He can afford and i5 though that would be best. And at least with an i3 his board would allow him to upgrade to an i5/i7 if he ever wanted to.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
guggi4

guggi4

Honorable
Jun 24, 2013
635
0
11,160
I5>fx6300>i3 in my opinion
A i3 is nice for your mother for surfing the web and checking emails
since it uses less power and the strong per core power is nice. But when im playing there is atleast ts3, chrome and steam running in the background and thats where the fx take the advantage over the
i3. Also look at the crysis3 benchmark that was provided, even the older bulldozer fx6200 smash the i3.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


The difference between the techspot and toms i3 perf is about2-3fps, likley due to different parts in the game and settings they chose to benchmark. The Texhspot does show the FX6x00 being ahead and while the i3 is doing okay, the FX6300 would be even better
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
PC-GIRL88

PC-GIRL88

Honorable
Jun 18, 2013
188
0
10,690
i have a fx 6300 and its on stock no OC and i play everygame so far on ultra with no complaints. With newer games using newer cores id suggest the 6 core amd to the dual core intel right now games are using 2-4 cores with newer games such as crysis and battle field using up to 6 cores and new systems are confirmed for using 8 core systems 2 of which for operating system meaning 6 left for games
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


It's definitely not "loads better." In about 90% of games they're equal. The biggest advantage though of getting an i3 though would be more upgradability.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


I would agree that the i3 currently has a better upgrade path with the i5's and AMD won't really have one to match till Steamroller hits late this year/early next. The FX6300's current advantage is potential future optimizations from consoles as well as aging better as games full use 4 cores/threads.

i3 = if you plan to upgrade soon, in which case might as well get an i5 in the first place
FX6300 = potential upgrade path that can match an i5 in the near future as well as a better choice if you don't plan to upgrade soon.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


Yeah the only problem is though no ones really sure how much better FX chips will get even with future optimisation. And I'd expect it to take around a year until game developers start taking advantage of the new architecture.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


I just think the i3 is stuck in a hard place right now. It performs as well as the FX6300 for now but will not age as well since it can't really process more than 2cores+HT and games are going more and more threads.
The i5 is above it and though it is a good upgrade path, why not just save up and buy the i5 now and not have to take the loss from reselling it? It's just not really that great of an option IMO.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


I pretty much have to agree, it's best just to save up the couple extra bucks and go for the i5.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
C

chairsgotoschool

Honorable
Oct 6, 2012
277
0
10,810
I suppose if you plan on updrading then an i3 or even i5 would be better, when me and a buddy build the pc with the 6100 we had and still have no plans to upgrade at all, if i were to guess i'd say we will wait at least 5 years and by then who knows what will be on the market or even coming soon.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


Even if you don't have plans to upgrade, trust me a couple of years from now with an i3 or an 6100 you'll be thinking about it. And with an i3 it would be cheaper to do so.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


Maybe AMD may be competitive again in a couple of years. Plus socket 1155 would be long dead by then and likely AM3+ as well though less likely. If you're not planning to upgrade within the next year, there is no point in planning for upgradeability. Only AMD tends to offer a upgrade path over the long term though I don't know how much longer AM3+ will last past Steamroller. I would say it would probably be better then to get a whole new mb+cpu since pcie+sata+instruction sets+other features will have changed a lot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thanksforthefish87

thanksforthefish87

Honorable
Aug 1, 2013
267
0
10,810


LGA 1150 isn't dead. Anyways it's best right now to get intel. With computers you can never really plan for the future besides a case. It's not really a huge difference between the to.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
stickmansam

stickmansam

Splendid
Oct 30, 2011
3,719
0
23,460


1155 is dead and 1150 i3s aren't out yet ;)

By your argument I would suggest the FX6300 if the OP is sticking with Op's original budget as it is better than the i3 in everything except that the i3 may have a better upgrade path with the i5 vs steamroller but we can't plan on that :p. If OP can save up, OP should get the i5 and not have to worry about future performance.

Its not a flat out win for Intel at all price points. i5 > 8350 > 8320 > 6300 >= i3
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
PC-GIRL88

PC-GIRL88

Honorable
Jun 18, 2013
188
0
10,690
And dont listen to people when they say "intel is better", or "get i5 its better" sure it IS BETTER but you will never notice..... on almost every benchmark between intel and amd intel wins but the amd STILL gives over playable frame rates..... If both play game son ultra settings with playable fps who the hell cares which is better save money and go amd.

I got a fx 6300 for $119 and i play every game iv put in my pc so far or downloaded at ultra settings with 0 problems. So why exactly should i of gotten the better i5 for $220????? I see no reason to waste the money on something cuz its "better" if both will get the job done you will most likely never see the added performance a intel will give you.

Think of it like this if the speed limits 60 mph (fps) and you have a normal car like a tarus (amd) that can do say 100 mph easily then you have a supped up sports care say a viper? (intel) that can do 220 mph sure the viper is BETTER but your never gonna go that fast so the added horse power is wasted for all the extra money you payed since both cars are only gonna be going 60 mph anyways....
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
ElMoIsEviL

ElMoIsEviL

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2006
2,361
1
19,965


Probably the most rational post I've read in a long time. This is especially true in this age of unemployment and dim prospects for the future. Save your money for more important things. Buy what gets the job done. I know the machine in my sig makes me out to be a hypocrite but I bought that with Bitcoin (and am lucky enough to have a stable job).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom