• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Very basic desktop/gaming rig...AMD 4130 vs. 6300

Meghan54

Meghan54

Lifer
OK. I still have enough spare parts to put together another basic gaming/decent desktop rig and only need mb/cpu. Looking at the two AMD FX chips, the FX 4130 and 6300, on sale at Microcenter. The 4130 is $69.99 right now with $40 off a compatible motherboard. The 6300 is $89.99 with same bundle.

Question is, would the 6300 be noticeably faster than the 4130, given these parts:

MB: AsRock 960GM/U3S3

I am considering this one specifically because it features both USB3 and two SATA3 ports. The comparable in price boards that I have available to choose from, the Asus M5A78L-M LX Plus and the Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3, lack either one or both of those features. The end cost of this motherboard is $14. Both the Asus and Gigabyte are free after $10 MIR.

GPU: EVGA 650Ti 2GB

MEMORY: 8GB (2 x 4GB) Patriot Viper DDR3-1600 if I want to be extravagant, 4GB (2 x2GB) AData DDR3-1600 if I don't

POWER SUPPLY: Toss up....have a Corsair HX620, Corsair AX 750 (prob. not), Antec Neo ECO 620W. Probably go with the Antec.

HARD DRIVE: 128GB Samsung 830 OS(have a few of these laying around), 1GB WD Blue for data storage



Thanks for the input!
 
The 6300 should be faster(gaming included) and a little more power efficient ... just a little. This is because of architectural differences: bulldozer vs piledriver.
I would personally go for the 6300 because of it's efficiency win only. Those additional 20$ might repay themselves after a while ... and a bunch of electric bills.
 
The 6300 should be the better chip all around. The 4130 has a little more clock speed (just a few hundred MHz) but is 5-10% slower per clock than the 6300 with it's improved Piledriver cores (the 4130 uses Bulldozer cores). So over all the performance in single and lightly threaded applications is probably pretty close. The 6300 also manages two more cores for much better multi threaded applications/game performance. Then lastly is the TDP, the 4130 actually runs hotter and uses more power being a 125 watt TDP CPU, the 6300 is a 95 watt TPD CPU. I can't think of a good reason to get the 4130 over the 6300.

*edit - For some reason I thought you said both were $89.99. The 4130 will save you a few dollars, but for the small $20 difference it would still be hard to recommend the 4130 in my opinion.
 
If you are thinking on the FX4150, why not get a FM2/FM2+ board and Richland CPU? No need to get a 4-5 year old platform unless you have to.
 
Was thinking the same before posting, but:
1. the 3 module piledriver seems better and more future proof than the 2 module richland;
2. gpu wise, piledriver AM3 + 650ti is better than richland;
3. richland microcenter bundles are more expensive;
 
Last edited:
I would go for the GA-F2A88XM-D3H FM2+ mATX + A8-6600K bundle = $129,98

Reasons vs FX6300 + free Motherboard

1. You will be able to OverClock the 6600K at more than 4.5GHz.
2. you will be able to upgrade to Kaveri and perhaps even Caristo.
3. You will get higher Single Thread and Gaming Performance with Kaveri.
4, you will get PCIe Gen 3 with Kaveri
5, Native USB3
6, Native SATA-6
7. Lower power and thermals

Those free motherboards only support 95W TDP, making Overclocking the FX6300 very difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top