Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

FX-8320 vs FX-6300

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 26, 2014 5:17:49 PM

Hi all,

I have a build with a 6300 in it, and I was considering swapping for an 8320 just since my local computer store is selling the 8320 for only $100. As far as I can tell, it's a very similar CPU with a couple more cores and more cache to go along with it.

My question is, what is the real world benefit of the 8320? I play GTA, Skyrim, SC2 with my R7-260X, and I also do some video editing/ graphic design.

Does the 8320 offer any substantial benefit?

More about : 8320 6300

a b à CPUs
February 26, 2014 5:27:35 PM

Well if the price difference it very low you should go for a 8320 and do some overclocking with it. It's quite faster.
m
0
l
a c 275 à CPUs
a c 179 À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:07:58 PM

More cores are helpful, and since thats 60 bucks cheaper than normal might as well grab it.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2014 7:14:16 PM

I believe the 6300 is not a true 6 core. I could be wrong but that is what I have heard. Meanwhile the FX 8320 is a true 8 core.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:21:09 PM

Its not a true 6 core or 8 core (6 logical processors or 8 logical processors, this doesn't make up the entirety of a "true" core though), its 3 physical cores and 4 cores, or 6 pseudo cores or 8 pseudo cores. The 8320 is worth the difference, but depends. There is no increase in single core performance going from the 6300 to the 8320, but you have that/those extra core(s) to work with. it will help a lot with;
-gaming (in games that are multi threaded like bf4 crisis 3 etc)
-rendering 3d images (since these programs use as many cores as you have.

what you WONT see is any SINGLE application run any faster, you can now run MORE applications side by side though (true multi tasking).

the 6300 can match an 8320 at stock if overclocked. the 8320 will be even better when overclocked. What are you planning to do with the computer?
Share
a c 275 à CPUs
a c 179 À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:28:17 PM

Actually the 6xxx and 8xxx do have 6 and 8 physical cores to them respectively.

They are in clusters of two, 8 physical cores sharing 4 resources. Its still 8 physical cores.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2014 7:29:28 PM

Beezy said:
Its not a true 6 core or 8 core (6 logical processors or 8 logical processors, this doesn't make up the entirety of a "true" core though), its 3 physical cores and 4 cores, or 6 pseudo cores or 8 pseudo cores. The 8320 is worth the difference, but depends. There is no increase in single core performance going from the 6300 to the 8320, but you have that/those extra core(s) to work with. it will help a lot with;
-gaming (in games that are multi threaded like bf4 crisis 3 etc)
-rendering 3d images (since these programs use as many cores as you have.

what you WONT see is any SINGLE application run any faster, you can now run MORE applications side by side though (true multi tasking).

the 6300 can match an 8320 at stock if overclocked. the 8320 will be even better when overclocked. What are you planning to do with the computer?


One of my older PCs has a Phenom II X6 1045t, is that a true 6 core?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:33:00 PM

I thought it was 3/4 physical (6300/8320) , each "physical" core having 2 logical cores. making it 6 or 8 "cores".
m
0
l
a c 275 à CPUs
a c 179 À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:33:37 PM

Yours has 6 REAL cores, while the 6xxx boasts 6 physical cores. (yours dosent share resources)

AMD dosent have hyperthreading like intel does, so they are technically physical cores.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2014 7:35:35 PM

Gam3r01 said:
Yours has 6 REAL cores, while the 6xxx boasts 6 physical cores. (yours dosent share resources)

AMD dosent have hyperthreading like intel does, so they are technically physical cores.


Thank you.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:36:16 PM

AMD defines the 4 physical cores as "modules" and then theres 2 logical cores on each module, making it 8 cores. and 4 fpus being shared amongst the 8 logicals . someone shed some light here! lol
m
0
l
a c 275 à CPUs
a c 179 À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:37:21 PM

An FX CPU is made up of "modules" that each consist of 2 integer processing units and one floating point unit. So an 8 "core" FX does indeed have 8 processing cores sharing 4 floating point units.
So simplified down, they are 8 PHYSICAL cores, but not independent cores, not hyperthreaded.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:52:58 PM

Ah, ok. 4 modules, 8 integer cores, 4 floating points. ok
m
0
l
a c 275 à CPUs
a c 179 À AMD
February 26, 2014 7:53:45 PM

(sometimes I with they didnt have such complex architectures :p )
m
0
l
February 27, 2014 8:39:53 AM

Beezy said:
Its not a true 6 core or 8 core (6 logical processors or 8 logical processors, this doesn't make up the entirety of a "true" core though), its 3 physical cores and 4 cores, or 6 pseudo cores or 8 pseudo cores. The 8320 is worth the difference, but depends. There is no increase in single core performance going from the 6300 to the 8320, but you have that/those extra core(s) to work with. it will help a lot with;
-gaming (in games that are multi threaded like bf4 crisis 3 etc)
-rendering 3d images (since these programs use as many cores as you have.

what you WONT see is any SINGLE application run any faster, you can now run MORE applications side by side though (true multi tasking).

the 6300 can match an 8320 at stock if overclocked. the 8320 will be even better when overclocked. What are you planning to do with the computer?


Well, I spend 90+ percent of my time web browsing and the rest I spend gaming or in content creation like power director, gimp or inkscape. I already have the 6300, but they sell on eBay for like 90-100. I figure it's almost a free upgrade, just have to spend the time doing it. I do overclock a bit, probably would upgrade the MB also if I do it to the Asus990 pro. I kinda just don't want to spend the time doing it though, so it's a balance of wasting time fiddling with my computer vs getting work done. I will have to reinstall windows and everything else right? What if I just swap cpu?
m
0
l
a c 92 à CPUs
February 27, 2014 9:25:20 AM

Piledrivers core isn't packed inside the modulsr. The module is the core. Fx 83x0 is a quad core with duplicated components.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
February 27, 2014 10:57:17 AM

vmN said:
Piledrivers core isn't packed inside the modulsr. The module is the core. Fx 83x0 is a quad core with duplicated components.


right and this is when/why it gets confusing because AMD would define their "core" differently, but the way you are defining it is the more traditional description of a core/module.
m
0
l
!