Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

AMD FX-6300 Overclocked vs. AMD FX-8320

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 12, 2013 12:02:52 PM

Hello all, I am working on picking the parts to my first pc build, which I am using mainly for gaming. Right now I have a FX-6300 and Hyper 212 evo for cooling, so I can overclock. For about the same budget, I can get an FX-8320 without the cooler. Which one would be a better option. Also, if anyone knows, would the MSI 970A-G43 be a good enough mobo to handle overclocking the 6300? I am hoping to get it running at 4.5 ghz, which seems like it should be easy from what I've read.
Thanks!

Best solution

a b à CPUs
November 12, 2013 12:11:38 PM

http://translate.google.com/translate?act=url&depth=1&h...



The 6350 (3.9GHz) outperforms the 8320 at stock, the 6300 (3.5GHz) is slightly slower, so if you can manage to OC the 6300 to at least ~3.8GHz, it will likely be as fast as the 8320 in most situations.
Share
a c 110 À AMD
a c 435 à CPUs
November 12, 2013 12:34:41 PM

I'd say the 6300 with the cooler.

The board is 970 not 990FX so 4.5 ghz is about the top end of what you should get out of it.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2013 12:37:23 PM

That motherboard sucks for overclocking. Even a mildly overclocked 6300 (4.5Ghz) would be past the safe limits the board could handle.

I would strongly recommend you go with a different motherboard. An Asus M5A97 R2.0 or an Asrock 970 Pro3 R2.0 would be a solid choice.

Asrock 970 Pro3 R2.0 - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-970pro3...
Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-motherboard-m5a97ler2...

As for everything else, it looks good. I've had several FX6300's past 5Ghz with a 212 Evo.

Between the 8320 and 6300 .. for gaming and general use, a FX6300 @ 4.5Ghz should be faster than a stock 8320. That said, add a $30 cooler to the 8320 and it can be a bit faster than the 6300. Either is a good choice.
m
0
l
November 12, 2013 12:59:28 PM

ish416 said:
That motherboard sucks for overclocking. Even a mildly overclocked 6300 (4.5Ghz) would be past the safe limits the board could handle.

I would strongly recommend you go with a different motherboard. An Asus M5A97 R2.0 or an Asrock 970 Pro3 R2.0 would be a solid choice.

Asrock 970 Pro3 R2.0 - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-970pro3...
Asus M5A97 LE R2.0 - http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-motherboard-m5a97ler2...

As for everything else, it looks good. I've had several FX6300's past 5Ghz with a 212 Evo.

Between the 8320 and 6300 .. for gaming and general use, a FX6300 @ 4.5Ghz should be faster than a stock 8320. That said, add a $30 cooler to the 8320 and it can be a bit faster than the 6300. Either is a good choice.

Which of these two motherboards would you suggest? They are both pretty much the same price at the moment. In case you need any more information to determine this, I am probably going to get a gigabyte r9 280x.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 12, 2013 1:29:48 PM

Both are great choices. I have personally built over 20 Asus M5A97 systems and all have had no issues. I've only built a few systems with the Asrock board, no issues out of that either.

Fit and finish on both are about equal, I prefer the looks of the Asrock board with the UEFI of the Asus board.
m
0
l
!