i3 6100 vs i3 6300?

[nitehag]

Is it worth the 10 extra bucks for the i3 6300? Can both of these run bf4 1080p at 60 fps? I have an r9 270x with a 700 watt power supply.

 

[Corey Schneider]

I'd say yes, it's worth it for the $10 extra. I don't know about 1080p 60 though. BF4 and ARMA3 are two good examples where CPU usage is more than other games. I recommend dishing out an extra $60 for the i5-6500. That should put you in a nice buffer zone

 

[lodders]

I agree, i5 6500 FTW. Stock cooler is enough, and 700W is more than enough

 

[3ogdy]

Buying a dual core in 2016 with gaming in mind is not a wise move. Quad-core CPU are the minimum you should get. Consider the i5-6500 or ...if you want to go the AMD route, the 8350, but the Intel is better. It shold run your BF4 at 60FPS at 1080p without a hitch. 700W of power is plenty for the 6500.

 

[boosted1g]

Worth the extra $10 yes,

Will either run a game at the specs you are asking for: no

You will need an i5 to run 60fps at 1080p and not bottleneck a gpu.
And frankly I doubt your GPU can do 1080p 60fps no matter what cpu you have.

700w power supply is more then enough power. Now there is a HUGE difference between a cheap power supply with a sticker that says 700w on it, and a quality power supply.
The cheap power supply puts 700w on the sticker, but cant even output 400w constantly, not to mention the complete lack of circuit protections so when that cheapo power supply dies it sends that bad voltage/amperage straight to your gpu and motherboard taking them out with it.

 

[Ari3l]

Buying a dual core in 2016 with gaming in mind is not a wise move. Quad-core CPU are the minimum you should get. Consider the i5-6500 or ...if you want to go the AMD route, the 8350, but the Intel is better. It shold run your BF4 at 60FPS at 1080p without a hitch. 700W of power is plenty for the 6500.

I mean you're right but that's not always the case.
The i3 when properly paired with specific components wipes the floor with the 2500k. (Hyperthreading ftw)
Not all Quads are beast, not all duals are shit.

 

[3023142]

Buying a dual core in 2016 with gaming in mind is not a wise move. Quad-core CPU are the minimum you should get. Consider the i5-6500 or ...if you want to go the AMD route, the 8350, but the Intel is better. It shold run your BF4 at 60FPS at 1080p without a hitch. 700W of power is plenty for the 6500.

I mean you're right but that's not always the case.
The i3 when properly paired with specific components wipes the floor with the 2500k. (Hyperthreading ftw)
Not all Quads are beast, not all duals are shit.

He's talking about the 6500k, not the 5 year old 2500k. The quadcores have hyperthreading just like the dual cores do, the differences that matter are cache size (6m on i5 and 4m on i3) and clock speeds. Old, single threaded applications may run faster on the chip that has higher clock speeds but less cores, but these are going extinct. Any new software is written using multithreading, and more cores obviously handle this better.

 

[Ari3l]

Buying a dual core in 2016 with gaming in mind is not a wise move. Quad-core CPU are the minimum you should get. Consider the i5-6500 or ...if you want to go the AMD route, the 8350, but the Intel is better. It shold run your BF4 at 60FPS at 1080p without a hitch. 700W of power is plenty for the 6500.

I mean you're right but that's not always the case.
The i3 when properly paired with specific components wipes the floor with the 2500k. (Hyperthreading ftw)
Not all Quads are beast, not all duals are shit.

He's talking about the 6500k, not the 5 year old 2500k. The quadcores have hyperthreading just like the dual cores do, the differences that matter are cache size (6m on i5 and 4m on i3) and clock speeds. Old, single threaded applications may run faster on the chip that has higher clock speeds but less cores, but these are going extinct. Any new software is written using multithreading, and more cores obviously handle this better.

-6500k? Typo hopefully.
-If you're trying to inform me that some Quads also have HT (Most i7), cool, everyone knows that.
-Of course he's not talking about the 2500k, i am the one who compaired it to the 6100, everything you said i know, the point i'm trying to defend here is that the i3 is a dual core and the i3 can beat a Quad that is still used a lot these days (2500k and maybe even others), therefore a Dual like the i3 is a wise gaming budget (NOT ENTHUSIAST) CPU.

It's not hard to understand, i'm just defending the i3 and that's it.