i2 3225 vs FX-6300

Discussion in 'CPUs and Overclocking' started by 0___________0, Oct 31, 2012.

  1. 0___________0

    0___________0 Senior member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Going to purchase one of these two processors Saturday, not quite certain which to get yet, looking for advice. The system will be primarily for gaming (BF3, Skyrim, Crysis). I also run a Linux VM and make heavy use of the CryENGINE 3 (along with similar programs for modding games). In games it seems to me that once you crank settings up in most demanding titles, unless you have two GTX 690s, the CPU becomes a non-factor. AnandTech even has the FX winning in games (I think it was the 3220 though). Obviously the i3 enjoys a sizable advantage in anything single threaded, but my most demanding tasks are multithreaded, not as much in some games as others though, but will the difference even be noticeable to me?

    If I went with the FX I'd like to OC, but the board is only a 4+1 phase MSI (970A-G46), is it safe? I know the G45 was prone to explosions, fires, blown capacitors, burning down neighborhoods, etc. but NewEgg has good reviews for the G46.
     
  2. SlowSpyder

    SlowSpyder Lifer

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    10,134
    Likes Received:
    4
    If you don't care about power consumption, I'd go with the 6300, especially since you're willing to overclock.
     
  3. Jimzz

    Jimzz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,060
    Likes Received:
    1
    If you already have a 970/AM3+ board then I would get the 6300k and put any extra money toward a good video card.

    Overclock without increasing the voltage and you should be ok.

    Looked the board up and it supports 125watt CPUs and the 6300k is a 95watt. So you should be ok overclocking.
     
  4. Yuriman

    Yuriman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,747
    Likes Received:
    6
    The FX-6300 has become my recommendation for a low-price, high performance chip below the 3570K. If you're planning to run stock there can be a debate, but the i3 doesn't compete in raw throughput because it doesn't overclock.

    That's not to say there aren't places I'd recommend and i3 instead.
     
  5. Centauri

    Centauri Golden Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    1,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    The 6300 is a beast of a chip for the price.
     
  6. Termie

    Termie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,818
    Likes Received:
    5
    This review of the 6300 should give you all the information you need: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review.html

    In games, it ties the 3220, but with overclocking will beat it. It wins in just about everything else as well.

    It amazes me that Intel continues to sell 5 or 6 quad models within a $20 price range, starting at $180. It could dominate AMD by dropping an i5 down to $150, but it simply refuses to price its lower-end quads sensibly.
     
  7. richierich1212

    richierich1212 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    1
    FX-6300, especially since you mentioned VMs.
     
  8. Arkaign

    Arkaign Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    19,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fx 6300!
     
  9. frozentundra123456

    frozentundra123456 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    9,087
    Likes Received:
    44
    Maybe they want to leave a niche for AMD, or feel compelled to by the need to have at least some competition. I do think that with their process lead, they could lower the price on the low end quad and bring out a mainstream hex core and would totally dominate AMD at every price point and still make money. But from a business standpoint what they are doing makes sense: they keep their margins high and allow AMD to stay around as a competitor to keep the regulators off their backs.
     
  10. Durvelle27

    Durvelle27 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Messages:
    4,102
    Likes Received:
    0
  11. NTMBK

    NTMBK Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    Messages:
    6,995
    Likes Received:
    33
    Fx-6300
     
  12. nemesismk2

    nemesismk2 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,734
    Likes Received:
    2
  13. inf64

    inf64 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    FX6300 is better choice for your needs,

    BTW just to illustrate how much cheaper Vishera is in Europe (Germany), take a look at the prices of 8320(practically the same chip as 8350,just change the multiplier and voila 4/4.2Ghz "stock"):
    FX-8320-152e
    FX-8350-182e
    3570K-208e
    3770K-301e

    The price difference is massive... 1 euro is 1.3 dollars. Boards are priced similarly. There is no 6300 on that website but I'd expect it to be ~20-30% cheaper than 8320.
     
  14. Insert_Nickname

    Insert_Nickname Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,652
    Likes Received:
    6
    Well then, I'll join the choir: FX6300...
     
  15. Arkaign

    Arkaign Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    19,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll amend my answer.

    Yes, still get the 6300.

    No, I don't recommend overclocking very far with that mobo. Check FS/FT, there are a steady number of people who had expensive AM3+ boards who waited for BD, were disappointed, and are willing to sell them for a loss. The 6300 still requires a good amount of power when overclocked, much more so than a Sandy or Ivy build. This doesn't mean it's not a good value for your uses though. I'd just use it at stock or near-stock until you have three things in place :

    A great mobo
    A very good cooler (water not necessary, but at least a well-rated tower heatpipe cooler w/120mm push/pull)
    A good to great PSU (if you're combining with a decent GPU)

    Get those together and bingo, recipe for great success. I would hate to recommend a cheapish mobo, only for you to have it fail within the year, it's a PITA. Ditto iffy PSU.

    On a similar note, maybe you can bump up to the 8320? It's not an insane amount more, and actually sounds like a great fit for your uses.
     
  16. frozentundra123456

    frozentundra123456 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    9,087
    Likes Received:
    44
    If you look at that link for the gaming benchmarks, the i3 is still more than competitive with the 6300. So I would say it depends on the use. For me, the only thing I do that is CPU intensive is gaming, so I would go for the i3 for equal to slightly better performance in games, much better lightly threaded performance, and lower power consumption. I do not overclock either.

    If your use will be heavily multithreaded, or you plan to overclock, then go for the 6300.

    Bottom line for me though, if I was starting from scratch without a mb, I would go the extra for a 3570K in preference to either of those. Yes it costs more, but as part of a 600 to 1000 dollar system, and if you use it for several years, the extra cost is minimal.
     
  17. 0___________0

    0___________0 Senior member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2012
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    The G46 is only $25, only way I could get the 6300 into my budget. 83XX is out of my price range, 8120 is only $10 more though, is the single threaded performance loss significant enough that I'd want PD? From what I've seen clock for clock PD is only like 4% faster BD.

    I figure the 6300 at 4.0ghz or the 8120 at 3.5ghz is relatively safe, I have decent cooling and PSU.
     
  18. inf64

    inf64 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    PD is ~14% faster in games than BD. Go with the better core,3 modules is more than enough.Once you OC it to ~4Ghz on stock vcore you will match or exceed the performance of 8120 in MTed workloads .
     
  19. Rvenger

    Rvenger Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2004
    Messages:
    6,292
    Likes Received:
    4
    FX-6300 gets my vote. Nice performance for the price.
     
  20. AtenRa

    AtenRa Lifer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    11,399
    Likes Received:
    139
    When you OC the FX6300 it is faster than Core i3 even in Skyrim.

    http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...57615-amd-vishera-fx-6300-fx-4300-review.html

    [​IMG]
     
  21. Arkaign

    Arkaign Lifer

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    19,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    To be fair. 4.8+Ghz is a downright terrible idea there with those CPUs. Super heat and power thirsty at those settings.

    4.2-4.3 is more manageable. Just like 4.2-4.4 is best for Ivy unless you really like pushing things.
     
  22. AtenRa

    AtenRa Lifer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    11,399
    Likes Received:
    139
    I will agree that i wouldn't run the FX6300 at 4.8+GHz for 24/7 but at 4.6GHz it will be fine.
     
  23. Meghan54

    Meghan54 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,669
    Likes Received:
    37


    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.
     
  24. AtenRa

    AtenRa Lifer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    11,399
    Likes Received:
    139
    That only happens in Skyrim, in general the FX6300 is faster than Core i3 at default clocks and destroys the Core i3 when OCed.

    You know whats more troubling ?? At the same price you could have almost double the performance of the Core i3 and yet people defending it.

    [​IMG]

    You dont need to OC that high for the FX6300 to be faster than the Core i3, you can OC easily to 4GHz with default voltage using any AM3+ motherboard and the stock HeatSink.

    You neglect to mention that FX6300 is ~24% faster than the Core i3 in Wprime, so using more power isnt terrible as you would like to make it.

    [​IMG]
     
  25. Yuriman

    Yuriman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,747
    Likes Received:
    6
    Perhaps the OP can get a 2nd-hand i5 or i7 in the classifieds? Maybe even a Nehalam-based chip. There's an i7 920 combo with motherboard + RAM going for $250 in classifieds right now, which is about what you'd expect to spend in just an i3 or FX + board, and it's without a doubt much faster.