g2030 vs fx 4300

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Sort by date Sort by votes
X

xgamer1500

Reputable
Jun 19, 2014
82
0
4,630


yeah its worth it, dobule the cores and threads, more cache. Better multithreaded performance. I don't care what these intel dinks say, the pentium is not going to beat it in the long run.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Skylyne

Skylyne

Reputable
Sep 7, 2014
678
0
5,160

The 4300 doesn't have more cores, it has two cores with multi-threading. People keep saying the FX lines have more cores than they really do, and I think that may be a marketing strategy on AMD's half. People aren't calling the i7 an 8 core CPU, but people call the 8350 (with 4 physical cores) an 8 core CPU. The i3 is a dual core, but the 4300 is a quad core? The 4300 has two physical cores, with two logical cores per physical core. I don't know why people keep referring to them with the logical core counts, instead of physical core count.


Is it worth the extra? Depends on how much the 6300 costs you. The 6300 will give you superior gaming performance, both at stock speed and when OC'ed. Unless you are really strapped for cash, or you live in a country where the 6300 is significantly more money than the 4300, you should get the 6300. Here in the states, it's about a $15 difference to get the 6300, which is worth the extra cost difference. It's also more comparable to the i3-4130, and the G3258, so it might be worth getting. The Pentium series does have some issues, though, so keep that in mind.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
X

xgamer1500

Reputable
Jun 19, 2014
82
0
4,630

Ok lets say i have an apple with two apples in side. How many apples are there? See what I mean? Now i will say that amd's architecture is not the best, but perhaps their excavator will be different. One thing for sure though is that the 8350 dominates the i5s in multithreaded tasks, streaming is a big one. So is it really 4 cores or is it actually more?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
X

xgamer1500

Reputable
Jun 19, 2014
82
0
4,630


no shit, i thought was comparing apples to apples..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anbello262

anbello262

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2013
1,179
3
19,915
I'm saying that the OP asked about a processor for gaming. It doesn't even matter that the 8350 is better than the i5 for gaming. You're just defending AMD chips now, and not sayinganything useful for OP's question. And about "the long run", neither of those chips are powerful enough to be considered relevant in the future. They're just the bare minimun as of now, so in the future both chips will be equally outdated and equally insufficient.

I agree with the 6300.
But if that's not possible, then I would get the pentium. I think it would work better for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
X

xgamer1500

Reputable
Jun 19, 2014
82
0
4,630
The most ive seen here is a bunch of shitting on AMD, they are NOT bad chips. Yes they lag behind in some ways but its apples to oranges, there are advantages on both sides. My suggestion to OP is to buy what he needs to do what he wants. The 6300 is a very good buy i would buy that over the pentium but again, it depends on what I'd do with it. Thats for the OP to decide.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anbello262

anbello262

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2013
1,179
3
19,915
I'm not attacking AMD now, and you should stop defending it when you're not helping the OP. You just said "buy what you need", and he's asking us here because he needs help choosing. "Buy what you need" is giving absolutely no useful answer. You're jsut starting to look like an AMD fanboy, and you believe everyone else is just intel lovers.

And yes, AMD chips are good for some things, whereas Intel chips are good for others. In this case, gaming is the activity in question.
And intel chips tend to be better for gaming than AMD ones in most cases.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Skylyne

Skylyne

Reputable
Sep 7, 2014
678
0
5,160

That isn't a real accurate comparison. Multi/hyper-threading is designed to allow a single CPU core to run two threads at one time, instead of running a single thread. For gaming, the way they are currently programmed is not benefiting from using two threads per core over a single thread per core. In the case of video editing, the ability to handle two threads per core is beneficial, for what the cores are calculating; however, that does not mean it is equal to two physical cores in any real situation. Because of the way MT/HT is handled, it can only be beneficial in certain situations. In this case, hyper threading doesn't really benefit the gamer, so there's no reason to use the "is it four or more?" comparison. Some i5 CPUs, by your standards, would also be considered 8 core CPUs... but do you still call them quad cores?

Bottom line: To answer your question, it's four. The way each apple handles the workload does not make it more than one apple; it's still one apple.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom