FX 8320E vs FX 6300 to be paired with GTX 960 : WHAT IS THE BEST CHOICE?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
R

runningrock

Reputable
Sep 17, 2015
47
0
4,530
Hi!i am planning an upgrade and at first i would go with fx 6300 with MSI 970 Gaming MOBO but then i saw the FX 8320e which is just slight costlier than the 6300. which of the 2 CPUs do you think will best work with GTX 960?

CPU SPECS:
AMD fx 6300 (6 cores/3.5 ghz)
AMD fx 8320e (8 cores/3.2-4.0 ghz)

NOTE: i don't consider CPU overclocking since i don't want to take risks of overheating my system.

THANKS!
 
Solution
Karadjgne
The 8320E, 8370E was based off the 8320,but some internals were changed, tightened, loosened etc. Yes, an 8320E can get to 4.8GHz, if you have the right cooling. The sweet spot, though, we're the ratio of power to heat is @4.2-4.3GHz. That's the peak of a nice gradual curve. Above that speed, you really need to apply much greater voltage, and therfore heat. Works the same on both cpus. So the only real advantage the 8370E has is better stock speeds.

As far as 95w limits on mobo's go, that's a relative limit. It's set for a stock cooler and stock voltages. AMD claims that if you use a 95w cpu on a 95w board at stock voltages with a stock cooler, in an adequate airflow case, the board will function within established tolerances and not...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Karadjgne

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Dec 26, 2012
30,740
4,559
142,790
AMD fx Cpus thrive on overclocking, getting much better performance with higher clock speeds. The fx6300 is an OC beast, getting 4.8GHz is relatively easy, for the most part. The 8320E, is a revisited and revised version of the 8320, which is a 6300 with 2 more cores. The E version does have limitations, 4.2GHz being about as good as it gets for that cpu. Higher clocks have severely diminishing returns over 4.2.

Apart from any OC considerations, the 8320E is the stronger cpu. OC may not be a consideration now, but that can change, especially if certain software minimum requirements are higher than the current speed of the cpu.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
R

runningrock

Reputable
Sep 17, 2015
47
0
4,530
so considering that i don't have plans on overclocking my cpu...FX 8320e is a good choice over fx6300? and do i need water cooling to overclock or a powerful fan with good heatsink will do?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Karadjgne

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Dec 26, 2012
30,740
4,559
142,790
AMD cpus run warm, to be sure, and the stock cooler is miserable once that happens, its quite audible. You could get by with the stock cooler, its what it is intended for after all, but most ppl will apply a small OC anyways, so an aftermarket cooler is warranted. The cm hyper212 EVO is a very good and economical choice, or if that's too tall for your case, the harder to get cryorig H7 is actually better, quieter, smaller, if just a few $ more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

MarksuryaB

Reputable
Nov 11, 2015
1
0
4,510
@ madmatt30 the first gen turbo did indeed boost some cores while lowering other cores but (after some digging) I found the current gen turbo (3.0 for the 8320e) actually overclocks all the cores. You can see all 8 cores running at 4.2ghz on this review http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_fx_8320e_processor_review,7.html

My guess is the E versions of the FX CPUs are chips binned stable at a lower voltage and run default at 95w but at full turbo pull about 160w as you can see in the above review at Guro3D.
From what I understand the turbo v3.0 is designed to run for a short period and before it gets too hot go back to standard clocks but if you have an aftermarket cooler that can keep it cool while in full turbo it will not throttle back due to heat.

Because the 8320e is the same chip design as the 8320, 8350, and 8370 just binned at different quality, if you provide the correct cooling you can get almost as much performance out of the low end 83x0 processors. In some ways the quality of the E chips are better as they can perform just as well as the non E versions but with lower power.

You can see an 8320e overclocked to 4.8ghz at http://www.anandtech.com/show/8864/amd-fx-8320e-cpu-review-the-other-95w-vishera/2

I have been happily running my AMD 965 at stock 3.4ghz for years but picked up an 8320e today for $109 and can't wait to see the improvement. The main reason for my upgrade is I recently added a second 7950 in crossfire and the AMD 965 could not keep up with the physics of some games.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Karadjgne

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Dec 26, 2012
30,740
4,559
142,790
The 8320E, 8370E was based off the 8320,but some internals were changed, tightened, loosened etc. Yes, an 8320E can get to 4.8GHz, if you have the right cooling. The sweet spot, though, we're the ratio of power to heat is @4.2-4.3GHz. That's the peak of a nice gradual curve. Above that speed, you really need to apply much greater voltage, and therfore heat. Works the same on both cpus. So the only real advantage the 8370E has is better stock speeds.

As far as 95w limits on mobo's go, that's a relative limit. It's set for a stock cooler and stock voltages. AMD claims that if you use a 95w cpu on a 95w board at stock voltages with a stock cooler, in an adequate airflow case, the board will function within established tolerances and not overheat or fail. Reality is that the better quality boards like the MSI 970 gaming are custom built pcb's, and are built to withstand the added stress, heat and voltages of high OC. That board will physically handle a 125w cpu all day long, but ppl do OC those cpus too, and thats where the limit is drawn, because that board won't handle the wattage of a 125w cpu at high OC. And then there's companies like ECS and Biostar, whose 970 boards should really be regulated to 65w cpus, for that same reason.

This is also why there are only a few high end 125w boards capable of the 220w needed for a 9590/9370 cpu.

For the majority of cpus, OC is a hobby, not a necessity, at stock speeds they are perfectly capable of doing the job they are intended for. FX Cpus are the exception to the rule. They don't really perform even close to their potential until somewhere close to 4.0GHz or better. Even AMD understands this. It's the reason there is a 9370/9590 in the first place. And those cpus are nothing more than the highest binned, super-OC 8320s.

To answer the question, if determined to stay at stock speeds, the 6300 is the better cpu. If you are even considering @4.2GHz, the 8320E would be the better choice. At that speed, an 8320E can handle a gtx970 and not blink.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom