Which one is better for gaming? i3-4130 or FX 6300?

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

Build 1:
AMD FX 6300
Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0
R9 270X

Build 2:
I3-4130
Gigabyte GA H81 (LGA 1150)
R9 270X

In your opinion, which one is better and why?

Alpha3031 · May 14, 2014

Depends if you wanna OC.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

Alpha3031 :

Hmm.. Okay. let's keep it like OC - Not Considered.

CTurbo · May 14, 2014

I would go with the i3 4130 or similar, but I would pair with with a B85 or H87 motherboard.

The i3 has FAR superior single core performance even over a heavily overclocked FX6300. The i3 would be faster more times than not because a dual core is all that's needed most of the time. Sure, there will be times when the six cores would come in handy, but even in those cases, the i3 would not be too far behind. I would also chose the i3 because it offers a far better upgrade path as you could get an i5, i7, or Xeon later. The FX's AM3+ platform is outdated, and is in need of replacing.

Oh yeah and when you DO overclock the FX, it loses it's value because you had to pay for a more expensive board and you had to buy an after market cooler. By then, you could have gotten an i5.

bicycle_repair_man · May 14, 2014

Neither is particularly strong, but between the two, the FX-6300 would be my choice. That said, my actual recommendation is that you spend the extra money on an i5. If you can't afford it now, wait until you can.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

CTurbo :

Right now, I'm using a machine with BUILD 1. If I buy new processor and motherboard, will there be any changes in gaming like increased number of frames per second or anything else that matters?

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

bicycle_repair_man :

True that but I'm living in a region where everything is expensive. I bought build 1 for about 924 USD (including the monitor, cabin, keyboard and mouse; No speakers)

Rationale · May 14, 2014

That depends on the game. The i3-4130 will be stronger in some, the FX-6300 will be stronger in some. In games that use 4 cores they should be trading blows. 6+ cores, the FX wins. 3- cores, the i3 wins.

Even if you OC the FX-6300, the i3-4130 will still be stronger in games that primarily use 2-3 cores, which is basically every game from before 2010 and half the games now.

I would personally get the i3, but that will depend on a few things.
1. How strong your power supply is (FX-6300 takes much more energy).
2. How good your cooling is (i3-4130 generates much less heat).
3. How many cores your favorite games use (as explained, more cores will favor the FX, fewer cores will favor the i3).

Keep in mind, some older games also have bugs with CPUs that use more than 2 cores. You might have to disable some of the FX-6300's cores temporarily and deal with the handicapped performance if you want to play some of those games without microstutter or periodic crashes (IE, Mass Effect 1).

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

Rationale :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66BiQsOM9_M

This video shows the difference between FX 6300 and i7 - 3770K while playing BF4. Both are so similar. Also, the power consumption doesn't matter on FX for me.

Edit: I hope BF4 needs 6 cores and how do I disable cores?

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV2Voo5h3eU

Look at this. This person has compared fx 6100 with i7 3770K by BattleField 4 gaming. Intel has got just 5-7 frames higher than AMD but the price difference is too high around 200$. This makes me to think why I should purchase Intel Processor? For playing games that uses highest number of cores, FX will work good (Thanks to Rationale for it).

Rationale · May 14, 2014

MostWantedSoulRider :

BF4 can use up to 8 cores, and will fully use 6 as well. Also, the FX and the 3770K look similar in that video because the GPU is the bottleneck. Either CPU outperforms the R7 260X that was used to test it. The stronger the video card gets, the more differences can be noticed from less expensive to more expensive CPUs.

For example, if you were using a GT 210, a $400 i7 would perform just as badly as a $50 Celeron.
But if you were using a GTX 780, an i7 would absolutely demolish an FX-6300 because the GPU wouldn't be limiting them.
That's how bottlenecks work.

Also, there is very rarely a need to ever disable cores. Like I said, only in certain old games. To do it you can used a program called CAR (core affinity something I forgot). It lets you choose which CPU cores are allowed to run each specific game. So if you do eventually run into an old game that doesn't run properly on too many cores, you could set just that game to use 2 cores or 1 core or whatever it needs, while letting your PC and the rest of your games use the full number of cores.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

Rationale :

MostWantedSoulRider :

BF4 can use up to 8 cores, and will fully use 6 as well. Also, the FX and the 3770K look similar in that video because the GPU is the bottleneck. Either CPU outperforms the R7 260X that was used to test it. The stronger the video card gets, the more differences can be noticed from less expensive to more expensive CPUs.

For example, if you were using an HD 5450, a $400 i7 would perform just as badly as a $50 Celeron.
But if you were using a GTX 780, an i7 would absolutely demolish an FX-6300.
That's how bottlenecks work.

Also, there is very rarely a need to ever disable cores. Like I said, only temporarily in certain old games. To do it you can used a program called CAR (core affinity something I forgot). It lets you choose which CPU cores are allowed to run each specific game. So if you do eventually run into an old game that doesn't run properly on too many cores, you could set just that game to use 2 cores or 1 core or whatever it needs.

http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php ->for temporary core disabling.

And if GPU has become a bottleneck in that video, we have to spend a lot when it comes to HIGH END gaming based on Intel Processor and so people would prefer consoles which would become way more cheaper.

Rationale · May 14, 2014

MostWantedSoulRider :

Rationale :

http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php ->for temporary core disabling.

And if GPU has become a bottleneck in that video, we have to spend a lot when it comes to HIGH END gaming based on Intel Processor and so people would prefer consoles which would become way more cheaper.

The i7 is only meant for extremely expensive builds. That's why most people don't use them.

In practical use, there will be very little performance difference from an i3-4130 to an FX-6300. As already explained, they will each perform better in certain games. Take it or leave it, it's not my concern.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 14, 2014

Rationale :

MostWantedSoulRider :

Rationale :

http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php ->for temporary core disabling.

And if GPU has become a bottleneck in that video, we have to spend a lot when it comes to HIGH END gaming based on Intel Processor and so people would prefer consoles which would become way more cheaper.

The i7 is only meant for extremely expensive builds. That's why most people don't use them.

In practical use, there will be very little performance difference from an i3-4130 to an FX-6300. As already explained, they will each perform better in certain games. Take it or leave it, it's not my concern.

I'm really sorry for questioning a lot in this. Anyway, thanks for your help.

sapperastro · May 14, 2014

When on a budget, I suggest AMD.

You can hardly tell the difference between the two machines you listed in any game except for a couple of specific situations; Skyrim will favour the i3, BF4/Fary cry 3 will give the edge to the FX. You will tell the difference in other desktop applications where the 6300 outperforms the i3.

You cannot go wrong with either, but in this situation I would go for the FX.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 15, 2014

sapperastro :

I strongly agree with your point.

CooLWoLF · May 15, 2014

You said your already using Build 1 correct? If so, that would not be a worthwhile upgrade (financial wise).

If you want to upgrade your performance, either overclock the 6300 or drop in a 8350 if you don't want to overclock.

MostWantedSoulRider · May 15, 2014

CooLWoLF :

I'm thinking purchase 8350 but what would be drastic changes in high end gaming that I would see with the new processor?

Edit: Some says the overclocked version of 6300 = 8350. Is it true? And even if it's yes, I'd rather buy 8350 as I am not much into overclocking the components.

coolcole01 · May 15, 2014

in well multi threaded games the 8350 will be at least 20% better

MostWantedSoulRider · May 15, 2014

coolcole01 :

Oh, that's nice. Will this be achieved by overclocking 6300? Just wanted to know.

coolcole01 · May 15, 2014

no oc will make it better but it is achieved by its having 33% more cores

MostWantedSoulRider · May 15, 2014

coolcole01 :

Do you mean purchasing 8350 is better then? Sorry to say that I didn't get what you said.

coolcole01 · May 15, 2014

an 8350 is better just dont pay more then 150 if its like 190 or higher get a 4570 but if you cant spend more the 6300 is a fine cpu

MostWantedSoulRider · May 16, 2014

coolcole01 :

Thank you for making me to know the facts; FYI, I cannot really depend upon 4570 (I hope you mentioned i5 there) as my motherboard has AM3+ socket.

coolcole01 · May 16, 2014

good stuff enjoy

Which one is better for gaming? i3-4130 or FX 6300?

Reputable

Honorable

Reputable

Pizza Monster

Splendid

Reputable

Reputable

Admirable

Reputable

Reputable

Admirable

Reputable

Admirable

Reputable

Honorable

Reputable

Distinguished

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Share this page