AMD FX 6300 @ 4.5ghz benchmarks

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,050
2
106
#26
^^ Are you using a M4A89TD PRO/USB3 board?
 

KingFatty

Diamond Member
Dec 29, 2010
3,034
0
81
#27
Yes, if you meant M4A89GTD PRO/USB3? That's what I have. I finished Starcraft 2 expansion so I reverted back to stock while I'm between games, but that motherboard was very stable with an overclocked FX-6300 for the entire game.
 

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,050
2
106
#28
Yes, if you meant M4A89GTD PRO/USB3? That's what I have. I finished Starcraft 2 expansion so I reverted back to stock while I'm between games, but that motherboard was very stable with an overclocked FX-6300 for the entire game.
Sorry, yes I did. I have the same motherboard and going to see if I can overclock the 8320 with it.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
6,649
0
81
www.teamjuchems.com
#29
Seriously debating just getting a 6350 combo at MC to replace my x6 and skipping my planned Haswell upgrade.

I want something new and shiny, but I am currently upset about the 4770k situation - that it is bereft of the L4 cache (expected) and TSX (disapointing - and really takes the shine off of buying what is the "most" premium mainstream SKU) and that the price difference would be ~$250... with which I could allocate to the monitor or video card budget... I'd feel weird buying a 27" monitor and 7970 ghz to go with my Thuban!

Thanks for this thread. Something to think on. I really with my AM3+ board simply supported Piledriver. Dammit, Gigabyte, you guys usually come through on this stuff for me! Bulldozer support only :(
 

KingFatty

Diamond Member
Dec 29, 2010
3,034
0
81
#30
Thanks for this thread. Something to think on. I really with my AM3+ board simply supported Piledriver. Dammit, Gigabyte, you guys usually come through on this stuff for me! Bulldozer support only :(
Hey make sure you look into this, maybe search if anyone has tried it?

For my Asus mobo, I believe it does *NOT* state that it would support Piledriver, rather, it only states that it would support Bulldozer. And even then it's still a beta version of the BIOS. So, maybe you could have the same benefit, where the BIOS says it only supports Bulldozer, but turns out maybe it actually supports Piledriver too?
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
6,649
0
81
www.teamjuchems.com
#32
Hey make sure you look into this, maybe search if anyone has tried it?

For my Asus mobo, I believe it does *NOT* state that it would support Piledriver, rather, it only states that it would support Bulldozer. And even then it's still a beta version of the BIOS. So, maybe you could have the same benefit, where the BIOS says it only supports Bulldozer, but turns out maybe it actually supports Piledriver too?
Definitely worth looking into. I'll see what Google turns up :)
 

yofocus

Junior Member
Jul 1, 2013
1
0
0
#33
I have the same processor at the Same clock speed and I'm scoring much lower. My geekbench is around 8000. Can you help me
 

BigChickenJim

Senior member
Jul 1, 2013
239
0
0
#34
4.5GHz is an awesome stable clock for that chip from what I've seen. I have the same CPU and just bumped mine to 4.0, but I also have a cheap (came bundled with chip) mobo and am generally just a chicken about OC. D:
 
Apr 5, 2013
59
0
0
#35
I doubt its "stability." Not at 1.456v. Unless you just have an amazing chip, the FX-6300 needs ~1.48v just to get to 4.4 GHz. You can boot with insufficient power, and you might even be able to run Prime95 due to throttling. But try booting up an intensive game on your 4.5 GHz @ 1.456v. Doubtful.

Just a question though, why'd you slow down the HT link to 2.4 GHz?
 

Pandamonia

Senior member
Jun 13, 2013
433
7
91
#36
We really need to see benchmarks comparing this 6 core to a 6 core Sandy with HT off. Then we can see what £100 does vs £400 intel.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
4,725
16
106
#37
I have the same processor at the Same clock speed and I'm scoring much lower. My geekbench is around 8000. Can you help me
it can be something else, or it could be that the MB can't handle the CPU power requirements properly and so it's throttling going on?
 

inf64

Platinum Member
Mar 11, 2011
2,808
27
136
crazyworldofchips.blogspot.com
#38
We really need to see benchmarks comparing this 6 core to a 6 core Sandy with HT off. Then we can see what £100 does vs £400 intel.
What would be the point of that? Anyway you look at it the two are not directly comparable. One is 3M/6 thread chip that costs 100 pounds while the other is 12T (no matter if you turn of SMT, it's still there as a feature) that costs 400 pounds. Plus the cost of motherboard skews it even more. Performance wise 6T FX has no way of matching 6C SB-E with SMT off. This doesn't make FX63xxx a bad chip at all (it's great perf/$ offering), it's just not in that class of products no matter how you look at it.
 

Pandamonia

Senior member
Jun 13, 2013
433
7
91
#39
What would be the point of that? Anyway you look at it the two are not directly comparable. One is 3M/6 thread chip that costs 100 pounds while the other is 12T (no matter if you turn of SMT, it's still there as a feature) that costs 400 pounds. Plus the cost of motherboard skews it even more. Performance wise 6T FX has no way of matching 6C SB-E with SMT off. This doesn't make FX63xxx a bad chip at all (it's great perf/$ offering), it's just not in that class of products no matter how you look at it.
The point would be to see how well the FX does in games and apps that can use 6 threads.
 
Jun 25, 2013
79
0
0
#40
The point would be to see how well the FX does in games and apps that can use 6 threads.
FX 6300 at 4Ghz should be on the same level as i5 3570k in Crysis 3, at 4.5ghz it should beat it.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
4,725
16
106
#41
FX 6300 at 4Ghz should be on the same level as i5 3570k in Crysis 3, at 4.5ghz it should beat it.
"Welcome to the Jungle" which seems to be the worst place by far for the i5s in this game with the latest patch

FX-6300 = 45,1 Avg-Fps
3570K = 54,7 Avg-Fps
8350 = 57,4 Avg-Fps

that means a the 3570k is much faster than the 6300 on average, even at 4GHz,
because even a 4.7GHz 8350 can't beat the 3570k in some other parts of the game.
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll168/maxforces/f2-3.jpg
http://pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/chaostheory/2013/02/crysis3/crysis3_cpu_human_1024.png

or the stock vs a lower clocked i5.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/O/M/375430/original/Crysis3-CPU.png

(tests with older version, but it looks like the patch didn't affect the AMD CPUs anyway)

so even on crysis 3 FX 6300 4.5GHz faster than the stock i5 is not entirely true, and this is just a single game (which is an AMD favorite).
 

GaiaHunter

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2008
3,507
0
81
#42
I doubt its "stability." Not at 1.456v. Unless you just have an amazing chip, the FX-6300 needs ~1.48v just to get to 4.4 GHz. You can boot with insufficient power, and you might even be able to run Prime95 due to throttling. But try booting up an intensive game on your 4.5 GHz @ 1.456v. Doubtful.

Just a question though, why'd you slow down the HT link to 2.4 GHz?
Why does a FX-6300 needs 1.48v to get to 4.4 GHz?
I'm running one at 4.4 GHz @1.38v.
 

Noisegui

Junior Member
Jan 14, 2014
1
0
0
#43
All is good so far. Will have to bump volts to see how much more juice i can get out of this processor.:eek:

Dropped multiplier to 14.5 from 17.5 in order to bump bus up to 305 from 225. Also pushed some mushkin 1600 to 2450 at stock voltage of 1.65. Not sure how to decouple my ram clock from the cpu clock. In progress....
 
Last edited:
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#44
I wouldn't go too nuts with the NB/L3. After a point you really don't get any more performance but you do add heat. Keep going, add a little voltage and get those cores up a bit more. What are you using to watch your temps?
 

nOOky

Golden Member
Aug 17, 2004
1,157
13
106
#45
I just upgraded her PC to a FX6300 and when I get time I plan to crank it up a little bit. I just couldn't see buying a dual core Intel for more money when this chip is now around $100.
 

monkeydelmagico

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2011
3,949
0
101
#46
In any case, I find this thread particularly interesting insofar as the 6300 has always struck me as an impressive value proposition for people desiring to build a solid mid-range system with better-than-intel multi-threaded performance and still very respectable gaming performance -- especially with its lower stock clock and unlocked multiplier, I would think that this chip would get more recommendations for OC-friendly builders on a budget.
I think it does get alot of +1 around here. Any time a poster comes around looking for a tight budget build somebody throws the fx 6xxx in the mix. Toms hardware has had it on their list of entry level gaming cpu for a while now.

At microcenter you can get a 6300 with a free asus motherboard for $100.- after rebate. That is ALOT of computer for tiny $$$
 
Last edited:

Erenhardt

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2012
3,251
0
101
#47
I feel like I should sell my phenom 965 and get myself 6300.
I have hd7870 and I don't plan to upgrade anytime soon. Is there any reason why I should take 8320 into account?
Knowing my luck, as soon as I buy one, AMD will release fx-6400...
 

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,805
3
106
#48
I feel like I should sell my phenom 965 and get myself 6300.
I have hd7870 and I don't plan to upgrade anytime soon. Is there any reason why I should take 8320 into account?
Knowing my luck, as soon as I buy one, AMD will release fx-6400...
FX 8320 will be a better match for your HD7870 IMO, it also overclocks to 4.5ghz with ease.
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,098
0
81
#49
I think it does get alot of +1 around here. Any time a poster comes around looking for a tight budget build somebody throws the fx 6xxx in the mix. Toms hardware has had it on their list of entry level gaming cpu for a while now.

At microcenter you can get a 6300 with a free asus motherboard for $100.- after rebate. That is ALOT of computer for tiny $$$
Awesome value for money, the FX 6300 is essentialy a Core i7 920 class CPU in almost all the benchmarks and games, it kills for the price range.
 
Jan 12, 2005
14,324
1,627
126
#50
I feel like I should sell my phenom 965 and get myself 6300.
I have hd7870 and I don't plan to upgrade anytime soon. Is there any reason why I should take 8320 into account?
Knowing my luck, as soon as I buy one, AMD will release fx-6400...

Both have the same base clock speed, the FX 6300 only turbos 100MHz higher. I'd get the couple extra cores. Single threaded and lightly threaded performance will be close enough that I doubt you'd ever be able to tell a difference other than comparing benchmarks. But the two extra cores may certainly come in handy.
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY