6 cores vs. 4 cores

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Solution
V
Depends on the CPU architecture and clock rate.
If you are comparing a 6 core AMD to a 4 core Intel, then the 4 core Intel is better for just about everything.
If using the same architecture (e.g. Intel core i7 4 core or 6 core CPU):
Most games will not use more than 4 cores, so for these the 4 core will usually be better if it is the same architecture and has a higher clock rate.
For heavily threaded applications, the 6 core will likely come out ahead unless each core of the 4 core is much stronger.
Sort by date Sort by votes
Depends on the CPU architecture and clock rate.
If you are comparing a 6 core AMD to a 4 core Intel, then the 4 core Intel is better for just about everything.
If using the same architecture (e.g. Intel core i7 4 core or 6 core CPU):
Most games will not use more than 4 cores, so for these the 4 core will usually be better if it is the same architecture and has a higher clock rate.
For heavily threaded applications, the 6 core will likely come out ahead unless each core of the 4 core is much stronger.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
of course a 6 core would be better
but for gods sake don't refer to amd fx 6300
you think its cheap but single thread performance is too weak that an 4 core i5 can outperform it
yes if you are comparing them with the i3's then its probably better

BUT A FX 6300 CAN EASILY OUTPERFORM AN i3
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Are you looking into AMD or Intel?

well.. you first need to understand cores vs threads.

for example a fx6300 has 3 physical core with 2 threads per core and a 8320 has 4 physical cores with 2 threads per core.
i3 has 2 physical and 2 threads per core, i5 is a quad core, i7 is a quad core or more with 2 threads per core.

advertising can certainly confuse people but for gaming more cores does not mean a whole lot and just because the fx9590 screams at 5ghz with 8 threads does mean it is going to beat a i5 with 4 threads at 3.4ghz.

edit- intel is generally stronger when comparing most chips because they are a newer manufacturing process with better ipc(instructions per cycle)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


You can't compare AMDs module architecture to Intel hyper threading.
Each module has two full integer processing units and a shared floating point processing unit. This is two cores.
Hyper-threading is smart scheduling of resources in one CPU core to represent two in Windows.
Intel universally offers less cores at a lower frequency for the same money, but each core is able to process more instructions per cycle.
In order of performance:
Intel Pentium 2 cores, 2 threads = AMD FX-4XXX 4 cores, 4 threads
Intel Core i3 2 cores, 4 threads = AMD FX-6XXX 6 cores, 6 threads
Intel Core i5 4 cores, 4 threads = AMD FX-8XXX 8 cores, 8 threads
Intel Core i7 4 cores, 8 threads = AMD FX-9XXX 8 cores, 8 threads
Intel Core i7 6 cores, 12 threads

At each level you will get people arguing one is better than the other. It largely depends on how you test them, overclocking potential ,etc.
It is also worth noting that at each level Intel uses significantly less power and produces significant;y less heat.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
For gaming its about clock rate and architecture. There are other things to consider here, Modern games are just starting to utilize 4 cores and Intel's CPU architecture has simple been more efficient at everything since LGA 775. So a 4.8ghz 6 core AMD CPU struggles to beat out a 2+2 I3 3.4ghz Intel CPU or a I5 quad core at a stock setting.

Rendering is effected greatly by clock rate, cores and efficiency. If you were to compare a I7 to a FX-8350, the AMD CPU will get stomped because of the efficiency factor but the AMD will beat out the I5 and I3's in most situations where all 6 cores can be utilized simply because it has more cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom