My Experiences with the AMD FX-6300 Processor

[ElMoIsEviL]

I've noticed that this place gets filled up with questions about what CPU to buy and usually the person is on a tight budget. I figured this post might be useful for you guys/gals out there looking to build a cheap, reliable and great performing all around Gaming Workstation.

I'm sort of in a privileged position in that I mine bitcoin (and a lot of it). Because of this fact I have built many high performing systems over the last few years geared towards my passion for cryptography.

But enough about me... lets get to the real stuff. I came across the AMD FX-6300 CPU while looking for a cheap processor I could use in mining rigs but which would allow me to also run multiple Virtual Machines (without impacting the GPU mining performance). The AMD FX-6300 excels at this task. I can run three simultaneous Dual Core Virtual Machines with a decent workload (3D Rendering) and not affect the GPUs from being fed by the CPU.

Thing is I also LAN a lot and I bought this Cosmos II Case with this fancy Intel Core i7-3930K and a whole slew of bells and whistles right? Well it's too freaking big to carry around. So I found myself yanking one of the FX-6300s from its usual duties and using that as my Gaming rig during my LANs.

We mostly play Left for Dead 2, BF3, Starcraft 2 and some older games such as Unreal Tournament 3. Of course the FX-6300 (which I tend to overclock to 4.5GHz) handles them all with ease. I've got it paired with two Radeon HD 7870XTs in CFx (usually used for Bitcoin) and the system flies.

When I am just on the desktop, during a LAN, and we're swapping and sharing files/links etc... and I've got a million things going on at once, and I'm ALT-tabbing etc... the AMD FX-6300 handles it all very well.

Yes, AMD has a problem with its single threaded performance, but it's not that big of a deal... I mean an i3 3220, which price wise compares to the FX-6300, might trade blows in terms of the Frames Per Second in a game but when you've got all those other things going on... that i3 3220 is going to make you want to put your fist through your screen (at least that's me as I have zero patience for lag).

At the ~$120 price point... there is nothing like the AMD FX-6300. Nothing I can find. And I've looked.

 

[dmmbbs]

I've noticed that this place gets filled up with questions about what CPU to buy and usually the person is on a tight budget. I figured this post might be useful for you guys/gals out there looking to build a cheap, reliable and great performing all around Gaming Workstation.

I'm sort of in a privileged position in that I mine bitcoin (and a lot of it). Because of this fact I have built many high performing systems over the last few years geared towards my passion for cryptography.

But enough about me... lets get to the real stuff. I came across the AMD FX-6300 CPU while looking for a cheap processor I could use in mining rigs but which would allow me to also run multiple Virtual Machines (without impacting the GPU mining performance). The AMD FX-6300 excels at this task. I can run three simultaneous Dual Core Virtual Machines with a decent workload (3D Rendering) and not affect the GPUs from being fed by the CPU.

Thing is I also LAN a lot and I bought this Cosmos II Case with this fancy Intel Core i7-3930K and a whole slew of bells and whistles right? Well it's too freaking big to carry around. So I found myself yanking one of the FX-6300s from its usual duties and using that as my Gaming rig during my LANs.

We mostly play Left for Dead 2, BF3, Starcraft 2 and some older games such as Unreal Tournament 3. Of course the FX-6300 (which I tend to overclock to 4.5GHz) handles them all with ease. I've got it paired with two Radeon HD 7870XTs in CFx (usually used for Bitcoin) and the system flies.

When I am just on the desktop, during a LAN, and we're swapping and sharing files/links etc... and I've got a million things going on at once, and I'm ALT-tabbing etc... the AMD FX-6300 handles it all very well.

Yes, AMD has a problem with its single threaded performance, but it's not that big of a deal... I mean an i3 3220, which price wise compares to the FX-6300, might trade blows in terms of the Frames Per Second in a game but when you've got all those other things going on... that i3 3220 is going to make you want to put your fist through your screen (at least that's me as I have zero patience for lag).

At the ~$120 price point... there is nothing like the AMD FX-6300. Nothing I can find. And I've looked.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[VenBaja]

My experience was a bit different. I upgraded from an FX-6300 to an i7 4770k this past summer, and gained a significant fps boost in every single game I have. People on the fence should look for subjective terminology such as "handles them all with ease", as you described playing various games. What does that really mean? I like seeing actual numbers myself. For instance, I can tell you that in upgrading, my average fps in BF3's multiplayer went from around 55-70, to around 80-100, and I see much less significant dips. The FX-6300 would routinely dip into the 40's and low 50's on many maps, which I would not consider "handling with ease".

It's all about what someone is willing to spend and what kind of performance they're comfortable with. Dipping into the 40's during a large, competitive online game is not something I like. Someone else might not care though.

 

[ElMoIsEviL]

Well in Battlefield 4 you can run the AMD Mantle Path if you don't like a low of 40FPS (which is considered playable).

You would likely go from say 45FPS up to 110FPS when paired with an R9 280x.

https://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2955064773524710940/3/

 

[VenBaja]

Well in Battlefield 4 you can run the AMD Mantle Path if you don't like a low of 40FPS (which is considered playable).

You would likely go from say 45FPS up to 110FPS when paired with an R9 280x.

https://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2955064773524710940/3/

Looking through that thread, people's numbers for Mantle are all over the place. I tend to believe the lower numbers when no actual video evidence is present. I have no doubt that Mantle improves performance, but I don't think it's anywhere near what you think it is. Here is a video example of a guy with the exact setup you referenced (FX-6300/280x) and he's getting an average of 60-70fps on a completely empty server. Not anywhere near the 110fps claimed by someone in the thread you linked, and again, not with any other players present. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMjXYmZzgkY

Also, what is "considered playable" is completely subjective. I could just as easily say that 20fps is playable...but it's not something I would enjoy. Neither is 40fps on a 64 player competitive online shooter. I want a bare minimum of 60fps.

 

[JunkyJeff]

Good review, and thanks for this. I am looking for a more budget orientated build this time around and was recommended the FX-6300. I've never gone AMD before so kinda ify. I just don't know if I should pick it over a i5 which cost about 40 bucks.