1) *Only some motherboards allow the i3-6100 to be overclocked.
I know of at least one from Gigabyte, though I think Asus has NONE. Some motherboards that DID support it also disabled this in BIOS updates.
I forget the model, but I know of one guy that got 4.3GHz fairly easily. Sounds great right? Sure, but it's really only about a 16% though at least it's a "free" increase and with a dual-core you want all you can get.
**Look for boards that support this, and check their BIOS updates to see if they've disabled it. You can always roll back to previous BIOS versions but then you lose any other fixes.
2) PERFORMANCE DIFFERENCE?
That depends a lot as you probably know on how many cores can be utilized. For a lot of games we can go by the SINGLE THREAD value. Let's compare:
i3-6100
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-6100+%40+3.70GHz
FX-8320e
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8320E+Eight-Core
So..
At stock settings, the i3-6100 single thread is about 1.55X faster.
*A lot of games suffer when a single CPU core can't keep up with the MAIN GAME THREAD of code. Having a CPU core that is over 50% faster helps with this.
Note that DX12 when properly coded for will help use most of the CPU at times, but this will NOT help with existing games, nor is there any guarantee that enough of the FX-8320e would actually be used for it to benefit. Further, DX12 games are not going to be the majority of upcoming titles for quite some time.
TOTAL processing:
The game or application has to use at least 75% approx before the FX-8320e is the better choice. (and it can even have a higher average FPS but stutter more due to the single core periodically being a bottleneck... it gets confusing).
Summary:
This is very oversimplified as there are other factors, but in general the i3-6100 is a far better choice for most games.