AMD FX-4350 vs 6300 vs 6350 vs i3 4150 vs 4330 - No OC

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

I want to buy a budget PC for gaming and I'm not sure which CPU should I buy.
I'm not interested in OC-ing.

I know that the 4350 has better single core performance than 6300, but is it worth it?

I plan to play a few games which don't have (I hope that they eventually will) multi-core support, like World of Tanks, and in those games the 4350 would be better, but in multi-core the 6300 outperforms the 4350, despite being somewhat cheaper.

Secondly, is the FX-6350 worth the xtra money over the FX-6300?

Then, how do these CPU-s perform compared to 2 i3-s, 4150 and 4330?

And lastly, is the i3-4330 better than the 4150? According to cpubenchmark.net it only has 5096 marks, while 4150 has 5060, which isn't really worth the extra 20 bucks (at least in my country) IMO..

Thanks in advance.

iceclock · Jul 14, 2014

6350 of course 6cores high clock

you got a winner sir

CAaronD · Jul 14, 2014

How much more is the 6350 over the 6300?

ksham · Jul 14, 2014

What motherboard is it going into?

I would choose the FX-6300 over everything else that you listed. The FX-6350 is good, but not worth the premium.

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

CAaronD :

$23

ksham · Jul 14, 2014

For $23, I would rather buy an aftermarket CPU cooler and turbo / OC the FX-6300. That will already be better than the FX-6350.

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

ksham :

Looks like GA-970A-UD3 so far.

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

Is that motherboard enough for OC-ing? If so, I would likely go with the FX-6300... But what about the i3-s?

ksham · Jul 14, 2014

Yes; that motherboard can handle OC very well.

The Intel Core i3 requires a motherboard change. On a purely gaming build, the i3 is better. But the FX-6300 isn't a bad chip. It's great for multi-tasking because it has 6 cores, compared to 2 in the i3. The problem with the FX line of CPUs is that AMD left it. It's a dead socket. That doesn't mean that the CPUs are bad. It just means that you have no good upgrades for the CPUs in that socket.

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

Thanks for the answer, I will think about it then.

iceclock · Jul 14, 2014

you said without but ok cheers

Pityukha · Jul 14, 2014

I will think about it, voted up your reply too, thanks

iceclock · Jul 14, 2014

cheers

ksham · Jul 14, 2014

You can still activate Turbo which is not overclocking.

iceclock · Jul 14, 2014

isnt it enabled by default?

ksham · Jul 14, 2014

iceclock :

For the FX-6300? No.

Pityukha · Jul 15, 2014

ksham :

Will that void warranty?

ksham · Jul 15, 2014

Pityukha :

If you stick with the default Turbo Boost settings, you will not void the warranty. If you increase the Turbo Boost multiplier, the warranty is at risk of being voided.

iceclock · Jul 15, 2014

default turbo no as ksham said

Pityukha · Jul 15, 2014

So you say that i3 is better for gaming? Because that I only need it for that - I currently have a crappy Intel 2 duo E7400, and it's OK for me except for gaming.

If there would be more AM3+ socket CPU's I'd likely go with FX-6300 & cooler and turbo it, but this way.. FX-6300 is a rather cheap CPU, so I guess it won't be very "future proof", and another 100 bucks for mobo when I want to upgrade? Rather an intel.. + a cheaper PSU will be enough this way I guess.

Which i3? I saw that 4130 is more popular than 4150, but I see absolutely no reason to buy a 4130 over a 4150.. Same price, while the 4150 has higher clock speed, newer, etc. Is it only because it is newer?

And a last question : What will limit me, the video card or the CPU, if I buy an i3-4150 and an R9 270X?
More properly said : Will an i3-4150 bottleneck an R9 270X?

ksham · Jul 15, 2014

The i3 is better purely on a gaming standpoint. So if the only thing you are running are games, then it works great. But if you were to multi-task with gaming and do a bunch of other stuff on the side, the i3 is not as efficient. The FX-6300 is not a bad CPU by any means. It's good for gaming and good for multi-tasking.

The reason the i3 is better is because each individual core of the i3 is more powerful than the individual core of the FX series. In gaming, these two cores are the most important cores.

Pityukha · Jul 15, 2014

Well, yes, it's purely gaming standpoint. When I'm gaming, I'm gaming, I have 0-1% CPU load even with this crappy core 2 duo E 7400, got used to it, I didn't (/don't) really have another choice with this CPU.

oxiide · Jul 15, 2014

Pityukha :

My advice would be that the FX-6300 justifies its existence by being overclocked. If you aren't going to overclock, I'd go with a Core i3.

As far as the various i3-4xxx's go, they're all going to perform within a very few percent of each other. Its mostly just a matter of +/- 100 MHz here and there.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i3-4340-4330-4130_5.html#sect0
Here's some benchmarks if you're interested.

Pityukha · Jul 15, 2014

Going with the i3-4150 then I guess, the performance difference between a better i3 is too big I think for that price.

Or should I get a better i3? And the i3-4150 is better than the 4130, right? (same price)

iceclock · Jul 15, 2014

4150 be your best bet sir

AMD FX-4350 vs 6300 vs 6350 vs i3 4150 vs 4330 - No OC

Reputable

Illustrious

Honorable

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Illustrious

Reputable

Illustrious

Splendid

Illustrious

Splendid

Reputable

Splendid

Illustrious

Reputable

Splendid

Reputable

Distinguished

Reputable

Illustrious

Share this page