AMD FX 6300 Vishera 6-Core or Intel Core i3-4150 3.5GHz Dual-Core Processor

[elijahreadd]

I made a build and these two people keep arguing over which one is better. I do not care about opinions of the almighty greatness of Intel or AMD, just facts. Which one is better with performance in playing modern games.

AMD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286

Intel:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116995

 

[Undying89]

Intel performs better in games no questions asked. I though we got through this...

 

[iron8orn]

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

for modern games the 6300 is going to better and if you overclock it it will put it up to the level of the 6350 but what your giving up with not going with the i3 is upgrade ability to some much nicer gaming cpu's

 

[iron8orn]

Intel performs better in games no questions asked. I though we got through this...

actually might be hard to tell the difference with a lot of newer games but like bf4 multiplayer the 6300 would take a clear win

 

[elijahreadd]

Well im going to be playing Far Cry 4

 

[elijahreadd]

Im going to get the FX 8320 8 core, 3.5GHz

 

[iron8orn]

good deal.. from looking at the requirements it seams to heavily favor nvidia gpu's

 

[iron8orn]

http://www.gamersnexus.net/pc-builds/1705-max-settings-gaming-pc-acu-far-cry-4-black-friday

I would really recommend to you a i5 and the best nvidia gpu you can get for the ubisoft games

 

[SnakeGTX]

Here is some stuff you need to know:

1: AMD mobos only support PCI-e 2.0. This means, in the future of gaming, when games start taking advantage of PCI-e 3.0, your mobo will start bottlenecking the card. This means, that your card won't be able to use all of its resources, and therefor, decrease performance. In the Intel builds, their mobos PCI-e 3.0 support will help them to use their GPU to its full potential.

2: Your not getting a six-core CPU, your getting a three real cores. Each of those real cores (that contains two AMD cores) only account for 1.54 cores, where two real cores would account for 1.9-2.0 cores (Intel's Hyper-threading is equal to 1.23 cores.)

Source 1
Source 2 (scroll down to the list of FX CPUs, and look at their core number. Should be something like 3 (6).)
Source 3 (Most important to understand)

3: AMD CPUs use a lot more watts. So, eventually that energy bill will catch up to the extra money for the Intel CPU.

4: AMDs FX series, is old, and dead. Down the road, you have room to upgrade with Intel. With AMD, about your best CPU is going to be a eight "core" CPU, that is about equal to a i5 (here). Where, with Intel, you could upgrade to an i7.

I would get the i3.

 

[iron8orn]

where is your source about pci-e?

 

[SnakeGTX]

where is your source about pci-e?

1

2

3

4 (No chipset has 3.0, even on Wikipedia)

 

[Outlander_04]

Intel performs better in games no questions asked. I though we got through this...

Not sure which question you were not asking but it cant have been about processor performance

 

[Outlander_04]

Here is some stuff you need to know:

1: AMD mobos only support PCI-e 2.0. This means, in the future of gaming, when games start taking advantage of PCI-e 3.0, your mobo will start bottlenecking the card. This means, that your card won't be able to use all of its resources, and therefor, decrease performance. In the Intel builds, their mobos PCI-e 3.0 support will help them to use their GPU to its full potential.

2: Your not getting a six-core CPU, your getting a three real cores. Each of those real cores (that contains two AMD cores) only account for 1.54 cores, where two real cores would account for 1.9-2.0 cores (Intel's Hyper-threading is equal to 1.23 cores.)

Source 1
Source 2 (scroll down to the list of FX CPUs, and look at their core number. Should be something like 3 (6).)
Source 3 (Most important to understand)

3: AMD CPUs use a lot more watts. So, eventually that energy bill will catch up to the extra money for the Intel CPU.

4: AMDs FX series, is old, and dead. Down the road, you have room to upgrade with Intel. With AMD, about your best CPU is going to be a eight "core" CPU, that is about equal to a i5 (here). Where, with Intel, you could upgrade to an i7.

I would get the i3.

There is so much bad information in your answer I will not bother to answer most of it .

But assuming your math is correct and an intel hyperthreading core is 1.23 cores then 2 of them = 2.46
And again using your math the AMD modules are 1.54 and there are 3 of them then = 4.56
The AMD obviously smashes the intel for performance , yes?

As for power consumption . The numbers are significant if you have a server farm , but a home user is going to have a difference in there power bill of less than $10 per year . Just eat one less pizza