I have a fx-6300 on a gigabyte am3+ amd ddr3 1133 720 g motherboard and was wondering how good for gaming it would be. Any suggestions on how high I can over clock it? In running 4 120mm fans (2 intake and 2 exhaust) plus the cup cooler (also 120mm) and the case is full of vents if this helps.
Is the fx-6300 (I think it's at 3.5) a good processer for gaming?
- Thread starter Jaredb1
- Start date
Ecky
Illustrious
- Feb 3, 2013
- 7,592
- 2
- 38,960
It's adequate for most games, but in the grand scheme of things it's pretty slow compared with other recent CPUs.
Nearly all games will be playable, and most will be enjoyable even, with the FX. So long as your CPU can deliver high enough framerates (e.g. if you find gaming unpleasant under 40fps, you need a CPU can deliver that), your CPU is powerful enough, and the FX-6300 is there in the vast majority of cases.
EDIT: This is an example of a new game where the FX will struggle, and provide a subpar experience.
Nearly all games will be playable, and most will be enjoyable even, with the FX. So long as your CPU can deliver high enough framerates (e.g. if you find gaming unpleasant under 40fps, you need a CPU can deliver that), your CPU is powerful enough, and the FX-6300 is there in the vast majority of cases.
EDIT: This is an example of a new game where the FX will struggle, and provide a subpar experience.
Dark Lord of Tech
Retired Moderator
- Aug 18, 2009
- 128,614
- 1,778
- 159,590
omfgitsrhys
Reputable
- Aug 25, 2015
- 103
- 0
- 4,680
Get an i3 4170 or a g3285- there some of the best intel cpu's for gaming 
Just save up that little bit longer and you won't be disappointed
Just save up that little bit longer and you won't be disappointed 
It's not very good, as stated by the image above.
i3-6100 or G4400 is an ideal budget solution, I personally have a G3220.
But, seeing you have an AMD board, try to overclock it to 4.5Ghz, most of those CPUs can reach 4.2Ghz easily.
i3-6100 or G4400 is an ideal budget solution, I personally have a G3220.
But, seeing you have an AMD board, try to overclock it to 4.5Ghz, most of those CPUs can reach 4.2Ghz easily.
why are you showing him a 980ti sli build benchmark? It doesn't make any sense for anyone to get a fx-6300 and build it with 2 x 800 dollar card. that is just stupid.
If you alrdy own the fx-6300. the cpu is know for a good budget build for gaming. you may not play every game with max setting. but you should be able to get by.
the key is your video card. don't do SLI caz it highly likely your cpu will bottleneck it. you should be ok on most video card tho. maybe not the 980ti but other than that. you should be ok. just go for what ever video card you can afford.
to OC any CPU. you will need a good PSU (gold), a good pick mother board that support the Voltage, a good pick cpu heat sink. fast ram, and a case that will fit all that.
for budget cpu heat sink you can try the EVO 212 I picked 2 up when it was 28cad about 2 years ago.
If you alrdy own the fx-6300. the cpu is know for a good budget build for gaming. you may not play every game with max setting. but you should be able to get by.
the key is your video card. don't do SLI caz it highly likely your cpu will bottleneck it. you should be ok on most video card tho. maybe not the 980ti but other than that. you should be ok. just go for what ever video card you can afford.
to OC any CPU. you will need a good PSU (gold), a good pick mother board that support the Voltage, a good pick cpu heat sink. fast ram, and a case that will fit all that.
for budget cpu heat sink you can try the EVO 212 I picked 2 up when it was 28cad about 2 years ago.
Ecky
Illustrious
- Feb 3, 2013
- 7,592
- 2
- 38,960
It's true that SLi GTX 980Ti has more driver overhead than using a single GPU, but other than when using multiple cards, CPU load is relatively constant, regardless of in-game settings. What this means is, if an FX-6300 is capable of only providing 31fps average in a specific scenario with a GTX 980Ti, it will also only allow for 31fps average with a single GTX 750Ti or R7 260x, regardless of graphical settings. You could lower the game down to 800x600 with minimum graphical settings, and that CPU bottleneck still doesn't go away.
Yes, an FX-6300 provides an adequate experience in the vast majority of games, but an i3 is faster in most games, costs about the same, and has a better upgrade path, so if there's the option of an Intel CPU, a builder should take it.
That's all I'm trying to say.
Yes, an FX-6300 provides an adequate experience in the vast majority of games, but an i3 is faster in most games, costs about the same, and has a better upgrade path, so if there's the option of an Intel CPU, a builder should take it.
That's all I'm trying to say.
he alrdy have the cpu and motherboard and he is just asking if he can play games with it.
don't tell him to go out and spend 200-300 buk for cpu and motherboard. just go for a reasonable video card and he is good to go.
for the 200-300 he can get a nice video card.
the ram speed may hold him back a bit tho.
and you are joking about the 800x600 right? Yes Intel is faster than AMD in most case and most game case but not by that much. you are talking about few fps. (1 video card).
don't tell him to go out and spend 200-300 buk for cpu and motherboard. just go for a reasonable video card and he is good to go.
for the 200-300 he can get a nice video card.
the ram speed may hold him back a bit tho.
and you are joking about the 800x600 right? Yes Intel is faster than AMD in most case and most game case but not by that much. you are talking about few fps. (1 video card).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question User RX 580 8gb red devil powercolor, asking original BIOS- Started by PizzaInGame
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
News Microsoft updates Windows 11 24H2 requirements, CPU must support SSE4.2 or the OS will not boot- Started by Admin
- Replies: 19
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram