First, taking an OC of 4.8GHz or more to "slam" an i3 3225 is just troubling. Look at what Skymtl had to do to hit it.....an expensive as hell cpu cooler, one of the best performing 990 motherboards on the market, and even at stock speeds the 6300 used 49W more than the i3 3225 setup. Of course, no power consumption figures were presented for that 4.8GHz OC.....don't want the AMD chip to look even worse on that front, do we? (Anandtech's review did give two power consumption figures: the 4300 OC'd to 5GHz and the 8350 OC'd to 4.8GHz. The 4300 OC power consumption increased by 50W. So, the 6300 OC'd has to have at least a 50W increase in power consumption when OC'd to similar levels.)
Second, whether intentional or not, Skymtl biased the test by using one of the best performing AMD motherboards on the market, the Asus 990FX Sabertooth. The i3 3225 was saddled with an Intel Z77 board, and while the Intel board is great and all, Intel boards are optimized for stability first and foremost, throughput performance is an afterthought. Intel boards may be stable as granite, but as for performance, they provide the basement floor compared to other boards of the same chipset.
Honestly, didn't it strike you as odd that the previous gen. equivalent Intel cpu to the IvB i3 3225, the included Sandy Bridge i3 2120 which was mounted on a Gigabyte Z68 UD3H motherboard, scored higher on that particular bench than the faster 3225? If anything, both should have scored the same, given they're both clocked at the same speed. But given IvB's routine 5% IPC increase over equivalent SB cpus, the 3225 should have squeezed out an fps increase over the 2120.....but it ended up slower and that can be attributed to using the Intel motherboard vs. something "faster", like maybe an Asus Max. Gene V, which is priced the same as the Sabertooth 990FX board.
And Skymtl knows that as well given his knowledge. So, intentional or not, that bench's playing field wasn't exactly level.
I'd even hazard a guess that the i3 3225's performance could have been at least the same, if not slightly better, with a much cheaper Z77 board like the AsRock Extreme4. Certainly wouldn't have been worse.
But going back to the OP.....he clearly cannot afford a $185 motherboard, something it's going to take to get those great OC's. So, his OC will be much less given his financial constraints and his performance from the 6300 will definitely drop backward towards the i3 3225's performance. But then you have to add in the extra cost for the AMD system to achieve the OC....a not so cheap heatsink, something you don't have to spend $$ on for the i3 3225 system, and a slightly beefier power supply to handle the potential 80-100W increase power draw of the 6300 when OC'd.
And those are just the up front costs. You also have to account for the increased cost of elect. over time running the 6300 OC'd vs. the 3225.
Facebook
Twitter