AMD FX-6300 for gaming a new gaming pc or alternatives?

[Jared S]

So, I'm building a new gaming PC. Currently, I'm thinking of going with an AMD FX-6300, but is that my best option. Is there a better alternative that will give me more bang for my buck. Planning on running it with an EVGA GeForce GTX 760 2GB Video Card. Does this sound like a good idea? Thanks.

 

[Entomber]

what is your entire build and goal for your budget?

 

[MrBoomBoom]

For the price of a 6300, there really is no better processor. Sure you can get some i3s for about the same price, but GAMING-WISE, the FX6300 is better.
And yes, the 6400 will work great with a 760.

Hope this helps :3

 

[JOOK-D]

In that price range, an FX 6300 or i3 4xxx series would be your best bet.

Which games are you looking to play? Some will favour intel's higher per-core performance, others the higher number of cores of the FX.

Personally I'd grab the i3. It will also give you a substantial upgrade path, whereas AMD doesn't have much to offer past a 6300 IMO.

 

[Ethan Baggot]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

 

[sapperastro]

Well, the i3 cannot overclock at all...

A cheap coolermaster evo 212 is all you need in the cooling department for a 6300, unless you are going to overclock the thing to the moon. Very easy to clock it up to the same specs as a 6350 without it breaking a sweat with a 212 evo.

The intel chip can be upgraded to better chips. The downside to this is a) the cost. b) unless you upgrade once every couple of years, the haswells will have vanished off the shelf, and the broadwells will need a new motherboard, and possibly RAM...and anything later will require a whole new setup. So again, in my opinion, it is a moot point. If you are going to go intel for gaming/decoding/editing/etc, either go for at least the i5, or go for AMD.

 

[coolcole01]

the 6300 is a great chip but depending on where you live microcenter will sell the 8320 for 99 bucks be on the look out

 

[JOOK-D]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

Once you factor in the cost of a motherboard capable of overclocking and a good CPU cooler, you could have just got a quad i5 which will beat it in any task.

 

[Rationale]

For the price of a 6300, there really is no better processor. Sure you can get some i3s for about the same price, but GAMING-WISE, the FX6300 is better.
And yes, the 6400 will work great with a 760.

Hope this helps :3

That depends entirely on the game. Many are still dual or tri core optimized, and will run better on an i3. Even the quad games still get similar performance on an i3 versus a stock FX-6300.

It's really only a handful of games that will perform better on the FX-6300. And there's a decade long backlog of games that have greater compatibility and performance with dual cores.

If you're overclocking, then yes, the FX-6300 is better. But if you're overclocking, you'll have to spend $60-$100 more on a better cooler and motherboard, and at that point you may as well just get an i5 that would outperform anything else.

 

[Rationale]

In that price range, an FX 6300 or i3 4xxx series would be your best bet.

Which games are you looking to play? Some will favour intel's higher per-core performance, others the higher number of cores of the FX.

Personally I'd grab the i3. It will also give you a substantial upgrade path, whereas AMD doesn't have much to offer past a 6300 IMO.

I agree with this. He could maybe upgrade to an FX-8350 eventually on an AM3+ socket... But at that point it's still similar performance to an i5-4570, and Intel goes up to the i7-4790 now. Once the FX-6300 is at its End of Life, the AM3+ socket is pretty much finished. Unless he goes for a 225w monster like the FX-9590, which is just sort of stupid considering those require $200 motherboards and $50 coolers, and more than double the power draw and electric cost of a similar Intel CPU.

 

[sapperastro]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

Once you factor in the cost of a motherboard capable of overclocking and a good CPU cooler, you could have just got a quad i5 which will beat it in any task.

If it was an 8 core FX, I would agree with you. However, it is a 6300, so a half decent motherboard like an ASUS M5A97 R2.0 along with a CM 212 evo is more than enough for some nice overclocking. This is what you would spend in any case. I know I wouldn't use a stock cooler on a 6300 or i5.

 

[JOOK-D]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

Once you factor in the cost of a motherboard capable of overclocking and a good CPU cooler, you could have just got a quad i5 which will beat it in any task.

If it was an 8 core FX, I would agree with you. However, it is a 6300, so a half decent motherboard like an ASUS M5A97 R2.0 along with a CM 212 evo is more than enough for some nice overclocking. This is what you would spend in any case. I know I wouldn't use a stock cooler on a 6300 or i5.

You're limited to about 4.3-4.4 for an 83xx CPU on that motherboard. I wouldn't go past 4.4-4.5 with the 6300.

You're going to need more than a CM 212 for that. Temp limited to around 4.3-4.4 with it (I've used one with an 8320).

In this case, an i5 would still outperform it. Even an i3 would outperform an overclocked FX 6300 in many instances.

I'd be happy to use a stock cooler with a chip if left at stock speeds.

 

[chainers]

Personally, I have the FX-6350 and it runs just fine. If you decide to get it, I want to echo what someone said about getting a cooler. I did not, and now my processor is heating up, so I had to order a new one. They are cheap as hell, and the thing does heat up a lot.

Just throwing that out there.

 

[sapperastro]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

Once you factor in the cost of a motherboard capable of overclocking and a good CPU cooler, you could have just got a quad i5 which will beat it in any task.

If it was an 8 core FX, I would agree with you. However, it is a 6300, so a half decent motherboard like an ASUS M5A97 R2.0 along with a CM 212 evo is more than enough for some nice overclocking. This is what you would spend in any case. I know I wouldn't use a stock cooler on a 6300 or i5.

You're limited to about 4.3-4.4 for an 83xx CPU on that motherboard. I wouldn't go past 4.4-4.5 with the 6300.

You're going to need more than a CM 212 for that. Temp limited to around 4.3-4.4 with it (I've used one with an 8320).

In this case, an i5 would still outperform it. Even an i3 would outperform an overclocked FX 6300 in many instances.

I'd be happy to use a stock cooler with a chip if left at stock speeds.

An i3 will not outperform an overclocked 6300 in anything except old games, and in that instance it doesn't matter, since both chips will perform good enough at stock speeds on the older stuff.

I would certainly HOPE an i5 would outperform a cheap 6300. I would be incredibly worried if the reverse was true, considering the cost differences. I would feel like a real moron too, having bought an i5...

If you want something for a budget, you have to be happy with 'good enough' performance. You cannot expect to have the same output of power as chips that are $100+ more. The 6300 is the hardest hitter for the money, but it cannot enter the ring against the heavy weights.

As for the overclocking part, I agree with you there. You cannot hit the upper most limits of a 6300 with that board, and I wouldn't even put an 8 core in that board. Stock speeds are good enough for gaming, but if desired, you can pump a 6300 up respectable levels on that motherboard with that cooler.

 

[JOOK-D]

Just a word of caution, the amd chips are really hot so make sure to get a good cooler. I'm running an fx 6350 oc'd to 4.3 and I have an h100i on it. Temps low 20's. The cooler is a beast. Also take into account that the fx6300's have more cores + it's a better over clocker than an i3

Once you factor in the cost of a motherboard capable of overclocking and a good CPU cooler, you could have just got a quad i5 which will beat it in any task.

If it was an 8 core FX, I would agree with you. However, it is a 6300, so a half decent motherboard like an ASUS M5A97 R2.0 along with a CM 212 evo is more than enough for some nice overclocking. This is what you would spend in any case. I know I wouldn't use a stock cooler on a 6300 or i5.

You're limited to about 4.3-4.4 for an 83xx CPU on that motherboard. I wouldn't go past 4.4-4.5 with the 6300.

You're going to need more than a CM 212 for that. Temp limited to around 4.3-4.4 with it (I've used one with an 8320).

In this case, an i5 would still outperform it. Even an i3 would outperform an overclocked FX 6300 in many instances.

I'd be happy to use a stock cooler with a chip if left at stock speeds.

An i3 will not outperform an overclocked 6300 in anything except old games, and in that instance it doesn't matter, since both chips will perform good enough at stock speeds on the older stuff.

I would certainly HOPE an i5 would outperform a cheap 6300. I would be incredibly worried if the reverse was true, considering the cost differences. I would feel like a real moron too, having bought an i5...

If you want something for a budget, you have to be happy with 'good enough' performance. You cannot expect to have the same output of power as chips that are $100+ more. The 6300 is the hardest hitter for the money, but it cannot enter the ring against the heavy weights.

As for the overclocking part, I agree with you there. You cannot hit the upper most limits of a 6300 with that board, and I wouldn't even put an 8 core in that board. Stock speeds are good enough for gaming, but if desired, you can pump a 6300 up respectable levels on that motherboard with that cooler.

Can you quantify "older games"? In which time period would they have had to be released for the FX to outperform the i3? Many games are still being released that can't even use 4 threads, let alone the 6 weaker threads of the FX. In this case, the i3 will outperform it. Even if you overclock the FX in these instances the i3's IPC is still too high regardless of the FX's clock speed bump.

I cannot agree that the FX 6300 is the "hardest hitter for the money". IMO the i3 takes that crown.

 

[sapperastro]

I hate playing benchmark wars.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/Tests/Crysis-3-Test-CPU-Benchmark-1056578/

That is one example after a quick google search of a modern game, where the extra cores come into play, and this will only continue in the future. And that is with a stock clocked 6300...

Best case scenario, your 4130 will get a 10% increase over a 3220...I highly doubt it would get a full 10% during a game. Benchmark, yes. Using a program, very, very unlikely.

 

[JOOK-D]

I hate playing benchmark wars.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/Tests/Crysis-3-Test-CPU-Benchmark-1056578/

That is one example after a quick google search of a modern game, where the extra cores come into play, and this will only continue in the future. And that is with a stock clocked 6300...

Best case scenario, your 4130 will get a 10% increase over a 3220...I highly doubt it would get a full 10% during a game. Benchmark, yes. Using a program, very, very unlikely.

Fair point.

Crysis 3 uses up to 8 cores. Most games won't use more than 4, and saying that they will is just speculation.

Thief is newer. Here are benchmarks.