Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

FX-6300 really worth it over i3 3220?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 12, 2013 1:32:24 AM

Pretty much just what the title says. I know the ivy 3 has the advantages of a good upgrade path, multithreading in the cores, great single threaded performance, and a great low price without needing to use an aftermarket cooler to get good temps. Works better on most games as they are coded better for intel (at least the ones I play), lower power consumption (but doesn't it use power from the psu? confused here, help)

FX: larger l3 cache (not sure what that means) extra cores for better multitasking, improvement in gaming over the i3 (according to benchmarks), overclockable but requires a good aftermarket heatsink which means I might have to sacrifice a bit for the gpu. May not work well in cpu heavy games...etc...high power usage...which might piss off my mom, lol.


I play cpu heavy games like wow, rift, tera, gw, LOTR: Online, skyrim, planetside 2, bf3. Frankly my only PC gaming experience was on my amd e-450 APU laptop on 800x600 at lowest settings on wow and once on my friend's athlon x3 hd 5770 PC during a scII lan party (which was like freaking awesome.) Sick of consoles, moving on.


All useless bs aside, what do you think is better, has a better resale value, and will last me a few years?

More about : 6300 worth 3220

a c 853 à CPUs
February 12, 2013 1:52:29 AM

The I3 is the better gaming CPU, the FX6300 will handle multitasking better and can overclock to catch up with the I3 which minimizes its gaming advantage.
(power consumption is based on the CPU design and Intel's is smaller and more efficient)
Score
0
February 12, 2013 2:46:47 AM

rolli59 said:
The I3 is the better gaming CPU, the FX6300 will handle multitasking better and can overclock to catch up with the I3 which minimizes its gaming advantage.
(power consumption is based on the CPU design and Intel's is smaller and more efficient)

Would multitasking like running 2 monitors and having a game on one and something else on the other cripple performance of the i3? Is the fx better in that? I need more reasons.
Score
0
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 3:51:20 AM

You'd probably do better with the i3 with those games. Both should last for a while but more games will start to use more cores so depending on long you'd want to keep the CPU and what you expect from it, it might be good to go with the FX.

The games you listed pretty much all favor intel slightly except for BF3.
Score
0
February 12, 2013 5:49:15 AM

A good cooler only costs 35 dollars for the fx
Score
0

Best solution

a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 6:02:35 AM

FX would perform better in online games since player physics are handled by the cpu [bf3 multi player, planetside 2, most online games that have more than 2 main threads] (e.g. calculating where people are moving on the map etc) while in offline games the i3 and FX are a close match

FX will be better with multiscreen but the performance diff is likely less than 1% unless you're doing CPU intensive stuff at the same time (streaming, video encoding, recording etc)

















Share
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 8:50:04 AM

The FX 6300 is the better choice and it doesn't really need an aftermarket cooler, neither does it consume a lot of power.
Just go with the stock cooler unless you're looking for 4+ GHZ overclocking and the power consumption won't really be that scary either.
Score
0
a c 79 à CPUs
February 12, 2013 9:01:52 AM

+1 for 6300
Score
0
a c 112 à CPUs
February 12, 2013 10:25:29 AM

i dont normally recommend amd but in this case vishera would be the better choice. spend a little more and get the 8350.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 11:38:11 AM

The AMD FX-6300 would be the better CPU of the two overall imo. I mean there are plenty of areas where the i3 3220 comes out and shines but when using a Desktop PC one generally likes to do many things at once and having 3 modules instead of 2 cores with Hyperthreading is much more beneficial for that.

What I mean is simply using several desktop applications at once. Say you're downloading movies/apps/games unparing them and then unraring them while watching a 1080p movie, surfing the web and chatting over Facebook and/or IRC.

Overall the AMD system would provide a better experience and lets be honest... having slowdowns during general usage is the worst.

Slow scrolling of webpages, text input lag when trying to post on forums or when chatting. Page is not responding and messages from Windows asking to end the application etc. Just really annoying.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 12:26:49 PM

I would probably get the FX6300.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2013 12:54:02 PM

Another vote for the 6300 fro me. I don't consider power usage to be a real world issue. Generally speaking its not going to make a noticeable difference to your power bill unless you go from a weak CPU and GPU to a top end set up your just not going to notice the difference in the bill.
If you have green considerations then that's fine but for most people the extra power usage is really a non issue.

Mactronix :) 
Score
0
February 25, 2013 8:51:41 PM

Best answer selected by DanteIsOnFire.
Score
0
February 25, 2013 8:52:32 PM

Thanks guys! I abandoned the thread accidentally a while ago and this really helped!
Score
0
!