Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

is fx-6300 good for gaming at stock speed?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 28, 2013 9:27:01 PM

I'm gonna build my first computer next month, but I got a question, is FX-6300 is worth buying even tho I will not overclock? (I'm not into overclocking and I don't know to) and also I would buy a 970A chipset in which I knew it is not a type of motherboard that is capable of overclocking. Should I just go for i3-3220? Please help me, I'm really confuse. I already have a 18.5" monitor and HDD. I'm into playing games like GTA IV, BF3, WOW and Sims 3. I would like to play in med-high setting in 720p.

1st Option:
Processor: AMD FX-6300
Motherboard: GA-970A-DS3P
Graphics Card: Sapphire HD 7770
Ram: G.Skill Ripjaws X Dual 2x2 1866
PSU: Corsair VS450
Case: NZXT Source 220

2nd Option:
Processor: Intel i3-3220
Motherboard: GA-B75M-HD3
Graphics Card: Sapphire HD 7770
Ram: G.Skill Ripjaws X Dual 2x4 1600
PSU: Corsair VS450
Case: NZXT Source 220

So what do you think? I need your opinion. By the way I'm on a tight budget. $500.

Best solution

a b K Overclocking
a c 803 à CPUs
August 28, 2013 9:51:29 PM

Yes. the FX 6300 is fine at stock for gaming. Overclocking an FX chip is pretty painless. Just a multiplier bump and you can match a 6350 without changing anything else. I don't really consider it true overclocking. You are just matching the speed of a more expensive chip in the same family of CPU's. FX 4300 to a 4350 and FX 8320 to an FX 8350. So at the very least, I would do that much to it. A 970 board that accepts 125w cpus, which I think all do, will be just fine in such a situation. You might want an aftermarket cooler regardless. Stock coolers tend to suck from both AMD and Intel.
Share
August 29, 2013 6:43:18 AM

logainofhades said:
Yes. the FX 6300 is fine at stock for gaming. Overclocking an FX chip is pretty painless. Just a multiplier bump and you can match a 6350 without changing anything else. I don't really consider it true overclocking. You are just matching the speed of a more expensive chip in the same family of CPU's. FX 4300 to a 4350 and FX 8320 to an FX 8350. So at the very least, I would do that much to it. A 970 board that accepts 125w cpus, which I think all do, will be just fine in such a situation. You might want an aftermarket cooler regardless. Stock coolers tend to suck from both AMD and Intel.


Thank you for your response. One more question, do you think the Corsair VS450 is enough if I overclock the FX-6300 to a clock speed of FX-6350?. For the aftermarket cooler, I'll probably go with Cooler Master 212 Evo, and I think it would just fit with the NZXT Source 220.

m
0
l
Related resources
a b K Overclocking
a c 803 à CPUs
August 29, 2013 7:00:00 AM

It should be fine with running an fx 6300 at FX 6350 speeds. Wattage estimate is around 300w on PC partpicker.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a c 479 à CPUs
August 29, 2013 9:52:33 AM

Overall, the FX-6300 will provide you better performance than the i3-3220. The exception that comes immediately in mind is Skyrim. Skyrim will perform better on the i3-3220 without a doubt and real-time / turn based strategy games; Diablo 3, Star Craft 2, Civilization 5, X-Com Enemy Unknown. Hitman: Absolution does perform slightly better with the i3, but only by 2 FPS - 4 FPS at 1920x1080 resolution.

In general, the FX-6300 will provide a little better performance than the i3 in most games. In Crysis 3 the FX should provide much better performance than the i3. In that game the i3-3220's performance was close to being half the performance of the quad core i5 (I think it was i5-3470), at least that was what the benchmark was telling me.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 29, 2013 11:46:42 AM

I wonder how much performance difference is between the new Athlon X4 750k and the FX 6300 at stock speeds.
m
0
l
August 30, 2013 3:20:19 AM

I see, well thank you for all your help logainofhades and jaguarskx. I'am now fully convince to buy the FX-6300 knowing that the only difference between the i3-3220 and fx-6300 is just about 2-4 FPS in which I believe is not noticeable at all. I also read an old post here that the FX-6300 is a much better multitasker than the i3-3220.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a c 210 à CPUs
August 30, 2013 6:21:16 AM

hardasrock said:
I see, well thank you for all your help logainofhades and jaguarskx. I'am now fully convince to buy the FX-6300 knowing that the only difference between the i3-3220 and fx-6300 is just about 2-4 FPS in which I believe is not noticeable at all. I also read an old post here that the FX-6300 is a much better multitasker than the i3-3220.


It is quite better at multitasking as well. The 6300 is a tremendous value.
m
0
l
September 1, 2013 12:14:30 AM

By the way don't you think its better to get the HD 7790 than the HD 7770?
m
0
l
September 1, 2013 6:04:30 AM

hafijur said:
The i3 3220 at 720p will play games much better at 720p then an fx6300 and the i3 3220 is much more responsive.


do you think so?
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2013 6:19:01 AM

hardasrock said:
By the way don't you think its better to get the HD 7790 than the HD 7770?

Yes, absolutely. And later, you can crossfire them to get a nice boost in game performance fairly cheaply!
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2013 6:33:08 AM

hardasrock said:
hafijur said:
The i3 3220 at 720p will play games much better at 720p then an fx6300 and the i3 3220 is much more responsive.


do you think so?

OP, he is a troll. Please do not consider his advice here. Anyone with a brain would not tell you to get a 2-core cpu over a 6-core. This is especially the case here; the 6300 is easily overclocked to 6350 speed with a simple multiplier bump in the bios. Its like free money!

If this were actually good advise and he was trying to give you input on going with an Intel cpu, he would suggest you save up some more money for your budget and go with an i5, which are great cpus for gaming.
m
0
l
!