Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Is the i3 better than any AMD CPU that's around the same price for gaming?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 8, 2014 9:50:11 PM

I always thought that AMD was better for budget builds for gaming, but I'm seeing a lot of builds with i3's and I was wondering why.

More about : amd cpu price gaming

a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:04:47 PM

i3 and FX6300 trade blows overall with the FX6350 faring a bit better

really depends on the game at hand

Haswell i3 has much better HT than previous i3 due to wider execution engine
m
0
l
July 8, 2014 10:06:21 PM

stickmansam said:
i3 and FX6300 trade blows overall with the FX6350 faring a bit better

really depends on the game at hand

Haswell i3 has much better HT than previous i3 due to wider execution engine


Can I get sources? Sorry, I agree with you, but I help others with their builds and people call me out and ask for sources when I provide an AMD CPU on another site I use.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:06:21 PM

Well the i3 has more potential with regards to future proofing, since you wouldn't have to upgrade the motherboard. To outpace an i3 in single-threaded performance though, you'll need to overclock an FX-6300 to at least 4.8 GHz or so (according to calculations I made from statistics found at CPU world). In multithreaded tasks, the fx-6300 wins since it has 6 "cores" (though in reality it's more like 3 cores, but that's still more than the i3 can say). So yea, the i3 is probably a better choice surprisingly.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:07:54 PM

Most people think that all the new games are going to use all of amd FX cores, but they are wrong. Except for very specific games like battlefield 4, pretty much every game on the market requires excellent single core performance way over multithreaded performance.

That is why the i3 can smash the FX6300 in most games.

BTW...FX 6300 isn't a true hexa core cpu. Sure it has 6 physical cpus but that isn't the entire story. Because amd assumed that all apps by today would require lots of threads, which is why they use a cheaper but excellent multithreaded cpu where it excels in multithreaded apps. How they did this is they have two cores on what's called a module, when the cpu only does intiger workloads it uses each core separately, but when it does a float point workload it has to use both cpus on the module to get the task done. So it's great at highly threaded apps, but absolutely terrible at single threaded apps. For more info go to Wikipedia and search for "bulldozer AMD"

So the FX 6300 is both a 6 core and a 3 core cpu.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:19:35 PM

AMD CPU comparison
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/58826_3/Evoljuciya_proce...

Intel CPU comparison
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/59160_3/Evoljuciya_proce...

You can also compare the FX6350 to the i3's here are as well
Even when the i3 beats the FX6300, both remain playable, near or above 60fps

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-43...

The i3 has the better upgrade path unless you plan to stream/record on a budget
if you have the cash the i7 is obviously best

as you can see, I run Intel CPU :p 
Share
July 8, 2014 10:30:18 PM

stickmansam said:
AMD CPU comparison
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/58826_3/Evoljuciya_proce...

Intel CPU comparison
http://www.overclockers.ru/lab/59160_3/Evoljuciya_proce...

You can also compare the FX6350 to the i3's here are as well
Even when the i3 beats the FX6300, both remain playable, near or above 60fps

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-43...

The i3 has the better upgrade path unless you plan to stream/record on a budget
if you have the cash the i7 is obviously best

as you can see, I run Intel CPU :p 


Thanks!
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:31:14 PM

The above deserves the best answer easily. That's perfect proof for the OP's question, and it falls right in hand with my calculations. In a lot of games, if you want to match an i3-4430 or so you need to drank it up to around 4.8 GHz for AMD.
m
0
l
July 8, 2014 10:33:54 PM

So the general consensus is that the i3 is better for budget builds currently? I'm more of a budget builder and put AMD CPU's on people's budget builds. I haven't been been keeping up lately, so I missed a lot of what's going on with hardware, so I'm just trying to be updated!
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 8, 2014 10:45:59 PM

There is no easy or simple answer :p 

It really depends on the usage scenario

which games will be played more often?
for long term the FX6300 should be better but by the time the gains appear, may it already be obsoleted?
this gen of games should use more cores due to consoles but will those same tweaks be applied to PC?

is there a upgrade in the near future?

how much does electiricty cost? the i3 tends to use less power so if electricity is pricey, the i3 might be better

if the person is willing to OC to say 4.5ghz out of the box or even down the line, the FX6300 can offer more value

if the person might upgrade down the line or dosen't want to OC the i3 wins out

will they be doing any recording, streaming or video editing?

you can see from xbitlabs, that AMD does better with productivity loads generally
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-43...

for average consumer load, I would suggest an APU over the i3 or FX6300 since you don't need a dGPU and AMD at $90 is hard to beat
Pentium's aren't really an option till even more budget constraints are applied as pure dual cores are out
m
0
l
July 8, 2014 11:02:19 PM

stickmansam said:
There is no easy or simple answer :p 

It really depends on the usage scenario

which games will be played more often?
for long term the FX6300 should be better but by the time the gains appear, may it already be obsoleted?
this gen of games should use more cores due to consoles but will those same tweaks be applied to PC?

is there a upgrade in the near future?

how much does electiricty cost? the i3 tends to use less power so if electricity is pricey, the i3 might be better

if the person is willing to OC to say 4.5ghz out of the box or even down the line, the FX6300 can offer more value

if the person might upgrade down the line or dosen't want to OC the i3 wins out

will they be doing any recording, streaming or video editing?

you can see from xbitlabs, that AMD does better with productivity loads generally
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-43...

for average consumer load, I would suggest an APU over the i3 or FX6300 since you don't need a dGPU and AMD at $90 is hard to beat
Pentium's aren't really an option till even more budget constraints are applied as pure dual cores are out


Thanks, about the upgradability. I read that the AM3+ socket wouldn't get any more newer CPU's.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 9, 2014 3:36:18 PM

Even overclocked to 4.5 GHz (precisely where my FX-6300 is overclocked to) the FX-6300 still seems to lose out against Haswell i3 by a very noticeable margin in most every game according to the Russian links stickmansam posted (in fact, in those posts the FX-6300 was OC'ed to 4.7 GHz and it still didn't perform as well as the i3 in most games).

For the average user, I would say that Intel wins as well. The HD 4000, 4400, and 4600 are nothing to scoff at -- I've managed to enjoy a good chunk of my Steam library (~50 games) on GPUs less powerful than those (AMD A4-3305m with Radeon HD 6480G). Not to mention that the Intel HD 5000, Iris HD 5100, and Iris Pro HD 5200 graphics are superb and actually do very well in a number of games -- competing very well against AMD APUs, with their one true pitfall seemingly being driver optimization. In fact the Iris Pro Graphics from Intel actually seem to be nearing or at the level of an Xbox 360 in terms of graphical capability. They're really quite superb. It's too bad they're so limited. I'm hoping that they become more commonplace once Broadwell launches.

But back to the point, for the average user Intel CPUs are much more reliable and outpace AMD for great prices most of the time. While AMD held the reins of the sub $100 category for some time now, Intel was never far behind, and dual cores are far, far from being out considering how the latest Pentium G3258 manages to outperform the Athlon X4 750k almost across the board when overclocked (and in games it does outperform the Athlon across the board). AMD seriously needs to step up their game if they want to compete.

AM3+ is likely dead too, and AMD seriously seems to be neglecting the more enthusiast market.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
July 9, 2014 4:33:12 PM

10% or more minimum fps = win
I left out the games that scored above 60fps minimums on both sides
i3 4340 vs FX6300 (FX 6350 is 5-10% ahead of the FX6300 and in some cases can tie/beat i3 when FX6300 cannot, value is not as good as FX6300 + OC + cooler = 6350 price)[but it means FX6300 with slight OC can be more competitive]

AC3 :Tie, FX ahead OC
Batman: i3, Tie on OC
Crysis: FX
Far Cry 3: i3, Tie on OC
Hard Reset: i3, Tie on OC
Hitman: Tie, FX ahead on OC
Metro Last Light: FX overall if not GPU bottlenecked
Saints Row: i3
Sleeping Dogs: i3, Tie on OC
Skyrim: i3

Avg minimum FPS: i3, Tie on OC

Stock results
AMD 1.5*
Intel 6
Tie 2

OC Results
AMD 3.5*
Intel 2
Tie 4

*Niche role in Metro
AMD 0.5

Biggest takeaway imo is that both sides pretty much give you a playable experience
It's when you want to do more things than just game that AMD becomes the better choice or your game is 1-3 cores that Intel is much better
Some scenarios like BF4 64man will always want the FX and some games like Skyrim always want Intel
Power Bill will eat into wallet though when OC or maybe even stock

Also keep in mind the i3 4340(3.6ghz) is 200mhz faster than i3 4130(3.4ghz)
the i3 4130 and FX6300 are the same price

I tend to suggest the FX6300 due to versatility in doing other things, OC, and tendency of most people to not upgrade
If there are specific needs, i'll try to match them
If OC is not an option or workload is not well multithreaded or power is a concern, i3 would be my choice
m
0
l
July 9, 2014 9:56:57 PM

Thanks guys!
m
0
l
!