Amd fx 6300 vs 8350: AMD FX-6300 vs AMD FX-8350: What is the difference?

AMD FX-6300 vs AMD FX-8350: What is the difference?

40points

AMD FX-6300

35points

AMD FX-8350

vs

64 facts in comparison

AMD FX-6300

AMD FX-8350

Why is AMD FX-6300 better than AMD FX-8350?

  • 9.5°C higher maximum operating temperature?
    70.5°Cvs61°C
  • 30W lower TDP?
    95Wvs125W
  • 1 newer version of PCI Express (PCIe)?
    3vs2
  • 0.33MB/core more L3 cache per core?
    1.33MB/corevs1MB/core
  • 15.19% higher PassMark result (overclocked)?
    7536vs6542
  • 58.0 more performance per watt?
    80.0vs22.0
  • 1 higher Turbo Core version?
    3vs2

Why is AMD FX-8350 better than AMD FX-6300?

  • 1.52x faster CPU speed?
    8 x 4GHzvs6 x 3.5GHz
  • 2 more CPU threads?
    8vs6
  • 2MB bigger L2 cache?
    8MBvs6MB
  • 43. 66% higher PassMark result?
    5926vs4125
  • 96KB bigger L1 cache?
    384KBvs288KB
  • 5.68% higher PassMark result (single)?
    1563vs1479

Which are the most popular comparisons?

AMD FX-6300

vs

Intel Core i5-3470

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

AMD FX-6300

vs

Intel Core i5-4570

AMD FX-8350

vs

Intel Core i7-4770K

AMD FX-6300

vs

Intel Core i5-7400

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD FX-6300

vs

Intel Core i7-3770

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD Phenom II X4 965

AMD FX-6300

vs

AMD Phenom II X4 955

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

AMD FX-6300

vs

AMD A8-7600

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD FX-8320

AMD FX-6300

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

AMD FX-8350

vs

Intel Core i7-3770

AMD FX-6300

vs

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

AMD FX-8350

vs

Intel Core i7-4770

AMD FX-6300

vs

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

AMD FX-8350

vs

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

Price comparison

User reviews

Overall Rating

AMD FX-6300

2 User reviews

AMD FX-6300

9. 5/10

2 User reviews

AMD FX-8350

5 User reviews

AMD FX-8350

9.8/10

5 User reviews

Features

Value for money

9.0/10

2 votes

9.6/10

5 votes

Gaming

8.0/10

2 votes

9.6/10

5 votes

Performance

8.5/10

2 votes

9.2/10

5 votes

Reliability

8.5/10

2 votes

9.6/10

5 votes

Energy efficiency

7.5/10

2 votes

8.6/10

5 votes

Performance

1.CPU speed

6 x 3.5GHz

8 x 4GHz

The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.

2. CPU threads

More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.

3.turbo clock speed

4.1GHz

4.2GHz

When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

4.Has an unlocked multiplier

✔AMD FX-6300

✔AMD FX-8350

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.

5.L2 cache

A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

6.L3 cache

A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

7.L1 cache

A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.

8.L2 core

1MB/core

1MB/core

More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

9.L3 core

1.33MB/core

1MB/core

More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.

Memory

1.RAM speed

1866MHz

1866MHz

It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.

2.maximum memory bandwidth

21GB/s

21GB/s

This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.

3.DDR memory version

DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.

4.memory channels

More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.

5.maximum memory amount

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.

6.bus transfer rate

5.4GT/s

5.4GT/s

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

7.Supports ECC memory

✖AMD FX-6300

✖AMD FX-8350

Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.

8.eMMC version

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.

9.bus speed

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

Benchmarks

1.PassMark result

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.

2.PassMark result (single)

This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.

3.Geekbench 5 result (multi)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

4.Cinebench R20 (multi) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

5.Cinebench R20 (single) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.

6.Geekbench 5 result (single)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

7.Blender (bmw27) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

8.Blender (classroom) result

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.

9.performance per watt

This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.

Features

1.uses multithreading

✖AMD FX-6300

✖AMD FX-8350

Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.

2.Has AES

✔AMD FX-6300

✔AMD FX-8350

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3.Has AVX

✔AMD FX-6300

✔AMD FX-8350

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.

4.SSE version

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

5.Has F16C

✔AMD FX-6300

✔AMD FX-8350

F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

6.bits executed at a time

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.

7.Has MMX

✔AMD FX-6300

✔AMD FX-8350

MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.

8.Has TrustZone

✖AMD FX-6300

✖AMD FX-8350

A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).

9.front-end width

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-6300)

Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD FX-8350)

The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better

Price comparison

Cancel

Which are the best CPUs?

AMD FX-8350 vs AMD FX-6300


Comparative analysis of AMD FX-8350 and AMD FX-6300 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Peripherals, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization.
Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).

AMD FX-8350

Buy on Amazon


vs

AMD FX-6300

Buy on Amazon

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FX-8350

  • Processor is unlocked, an unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
  • 2 more cores, run more applications at once: 8 vs 6
  • 2 more threads: 8 vs 6
  • Around 11% higher clock speed: 4.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz
  • Around 33% more L1 cache; more data can be stored in the L1 cache for quick access later
  • Around 33% more L2 cache; more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
  • Around 6% better performance in PassMark — Single thread mark: 1577 vs 1489
  • Around 44% better performance in PassMark — CPU mark: 5999 vs 4176
  • Around 7% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Single Core: 566 vs 527
  • Around 44% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core: 2751 vs 1914
  • Around 49% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score: 3132 vs 2098
  • Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s): 9.886 vs 6.905
  • Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 21.912 vs 16.195
  • Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.424 vs 0.339
  • Around 41% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s): 1.199 vs 0.85
  • Around 50% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 7.137 vs 4.767

















Unlocked Unlocked vs Locked
Number of cores 8 vs 6
Number of threads 8 vs 6
Maximum frequency 4.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz
L1 cache 384 KB vs 288 KB
L2 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB
PassMark — Single thread mark 1577 vs 1489
PassMark — CPU mark 5999 vs 4176
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 566 vs 527
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 2751 vs 1914
3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score 3132 vs 2098
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 9.886 vs 6.905
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 21.912 vs 16.195
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.424 vs 0.339
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 1.199 vs 0.85
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 7.137 vs 4.767

Reasons to consider the AMD FX-6300

  • Around 16% higher maximum core temperature: 70.50°C vs 61°C
  • Around 32% lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 125 Watt



Maximum core temperature 70. 50°C vs 61°C
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 95 Watt vs 125 Watt

Compare benchmarks


CPU 1: AMD FX-8350
CPU 2: AMD FX-6300











PassMark — Single thread mark

CPU 1
CPU 2


PassMark — CPU mark

CPU 1
CPU 2


Geekbench 4 — Single Core

CPU 1
CPU 2


Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core

CPU 1
CPU 2


3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2

21.912

16.195

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2













Name AMD FX-8350 AMD FX-6300
PassMark — Single thread mark 1577 1489
PassMark — CPU mark 5999 4176
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 566 527
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 2751 1914
3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score 3132 2098
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 9.886 6.905
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 21.912 16.195
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.424 0.339
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 1.199 0.85
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 7.137 4.767

Compare specifications (specs)





































AMD FX-8350 AMD FX-6300
Architecture codename Vishera Vishera
Family AMD FX-Series Processors AMD FX-Series Processors
Launch date 23 October 2012 October 2012
OPN PIB FD8350FRHKBOX FD6300WMHKBOX
OPN Tray FD8350FRW8KHK FD6300WMW6KHK
Place in performance rating 1723 1981
Price now $79. 99 $58.99
Series AMD FX 8-Core Black Edition Processors AMD FX 6-Core Black Edition Processors
Value for money (0-100) 32.95 31.81
Vertical segment Desktop Desktop
64 bit support
Base frequency 4 GHz 3.5 GHz
Die size 315 mm 315 mm
L1 cache 384 KB 288 KB
L2 cache 8 MB 6 MB
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
Manufacturing process technology 32 nm SOI 32 nm SOI
Maximum core temperature 61°C 70. 50°C
Maximum frequency 4.2 GHz 3.8 GHz
Number of cores 8 6
Number of threads 8 6
P0 Vcore voltage Min: 1.2 V — Max: 1.4 V Min: 1.15 V — Max: 1.3875 V
Transistor count 1200 Million 1200 million
Unlocked
Supported memory frequency 1866 MHz 1866 MHz
Supported memory types DDR3 DDR3
Max number of CPUs in a configuration 1 1
Sockets supported AM3+ AM3+
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt
PCI Express revision n / a 3. 0
Fused Multiply-Add (FMA)
Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX)
Intel® AES New Instructions
Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4)

AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™)

Navigation

Choose a CPU

Compare processors

Compare AMD FX-8350 with others




AMD
FX-8350



vs



AMD
Athlon 64 X2 3600+




AMD
FX-8350



vs



AMD
Athlon II X4 600e




AMD
FX-8350



vs



Intel
Celeron G1101




AMD
FX-8350



vs



Intel
Core i5-2500K




AMD
FX-8350



vs



AMD
A6-3670K




AMD
FX-8350



vs



Intel
Core i5-3470S

FX-8350 Eight-Core vs FX-6300 Six-Core — Call of Duty Modern Warfare with RX 570 Benchmarks 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K Comparison

RX 570 with

AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core

Call of Duty Modern Warfare

RX 570 with

AMD FX-6300 Six-Core


FX-8350 Eight-Core
FX-6300 Six-Core

Multi-Thread Performance

8948 Pts

6385 Pts

Single-Thread Performance

1509 Pts

1407 Pts

Call of Duty Modern Warfare

FX-8350 Eight-Core vs FX-6300 Six-Core in Call of Duty Modern Warfare using RX 570 — CPU Performance comparison at Ultra, High, Medium, and Low Quality Settings with 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K resolutions

FX-8350 Eight-Core
FX-6300 Six-Core


Ultra Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

48. 5 FPS

1080p

39.8 FPS

1440p

35.0 FPS

1440p

28.7 FPS

2160p

20.9 FPS

2160p

17.1 FPS

w1440p

29.9 FPS

w1440p

24.5 FPS

High Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

85.2 FPS

1080p

71.9 FPS

1440p

64.3 FPS

1440p

54.2 FPS

2160p

41.1 FPS

2160p

34.5 FPS

w1440p

56.1 FPS

w1440p

47.2 FPS

Medium Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

121. 9 FPS

1080p

104.0 FPS

1440p

93.7 FPS

1440p

79.7 FPS

2160p

61.3 FPS

2160p

51.9 FPS

w1440p

82.4 FPS

w1440p

69.9 FPS

Low Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p

195.3 FPS

1080p

168.1 FPS

1440p

152.3 FPS

1440p

130.6 FPS

2160p

101.7 FPS

2160p

86.7 FPS

w1440p

134.8 FPS

w1440p

115.4 FPS

FX-8350 Eight-Core
    FX-6300 Six-Core

      Compare FX-8350 Eight-Core vs FX-6300 Six-Core specifications

      Share Your Comments 22

      Compare FX-8350 Eight-Core vs FX-6300 Six-Core in more games

      Elden Ring

      2022

      God of War

      2022

      Overwatch 2

      2022

      Forza Horizon 5

      2021

      Halo Infinite

      2021

      Battlefield 2042

      2021

      Assassin’s Creed Valhalla

      2020

      Microsoft Flight Simulator

      2020

      Valorant

      2020

      Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War

      2020

      Death Stranding

      2020

      Marvel’s Avengers

      2020

      Godfall

      2020

      Cyberpunk 2077

      2020

      Apex Legends

      2019

      Anthem

      2019

      Far Cry New Dawn

      2019

      Resident Evil 2

      2019

      Metro Exodus

      2019

      World War Z

      2019

      Gears of War 5

      2019

      F1 2019

      2019

      GreedFall

      2019

      Borderlands 3

      2019

      Call of Duty Modern Warfare

      2019

      Red Dead Redemption 2

      2019

      Need For Speed: Heat

      2019

      Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

      2018

      Battlefield V

      2018

      Call of Duty: Black Ops 4

      2018

      Final Fantasy XV

      2018

      Shadow of the Tomb Raider

      2018

      Forza Horizon 4

      2018

      Fallout 76

      2018

      Hitman 2

      2018

      Just Cause 4

      2018

      Monster Hunter: World

      2018

      Strange Brigade

      2018

      Assassin’s Creed Origins

      2017

      Dawn of War III

      2017

      Ghost Recon Wildlands

      2017

      Destiny 2

      2017

      PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds

      2017

      Fortnite Battle Royale

      2017

      Need For Speed: Payback

      2017

      For Honor

      2017

      Project CARS 2

      2017

      Forza Motorsport 7

      2017

      Ashes of the Singularity

      2016

      Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation

      2016

      Battlefield 1

      2016

      Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

      2016

      Doom

      2016

      F1 2016

      2016

      Hitman

      2016

      Rise of the Tomb Raider

      2016

      The Division

      2016

      Total War: Warhammer

      2016

      Overwatch

      2016

      Dishonored 2

      2016

      DiRT Rally

      2015

      Grand Theft Auto V

      2015

      The Witcher 3

      2015

      Rocket League

      2015

      Need For Speed

      2015

      Project CARS

      2015

      Rainbow Six Siege

      2015

      Battlefield 4

      2013

      Crysis 3

      2013

      Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

      2012

      League of Legends

      2009

      Minecraft

      2009

      AMD FX-8350 vs AMD FX-6300








      AMD FX-8350 vs AMD FX-6300

      Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the AMD FX-8350 on one side and the AMD FX-6300 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 8 cores, 8 threads, a maximum frequency of 4,2GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 6 cores, 6 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3,8 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values ​​obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.

      This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.

      Specifications:

      Processor

      AMD FX-8350

      AMD FX-6300
      Market (main)

      Desktop

      Desktop
      ISA

      x86-64 (64 bit)

      x86-64 (64 bit)
      Microarchitecture

      Piledriver

      Piledriver
      Core name

      Vishera

      Vishera
      Family

      FX-8000

      FX-6000
      Part number(s), S-Spec

      FD8350FRW8KHK,

      FD8350FRHKBOX,

      FX-8350 Black Edition

      FD6300WMW6KHK,

      FD6300WMHKBOX

      Release date

      Q4 2012

      Q4 2012
      Lithography

      32 nm SOI

      32 nm SOI
      Transistors

      1. 200.000.000

      1.200.000.000
      Cores

      8

      6
      Threads

      8

      6
      Base frequency

      4,0 GHz

      3,5 GHz
      Turbo frequency

      4,2 GHz

      3,8 GHz
      Cache memory

      8 MB

      8 MB
      Max memory capacity

      32 GB

      32 GB
      Memory types

      DDR3-1866

      DDR3-1866
      Max # of memory channels

      2

      2
      Max memory bandwidth

      29,9 GB/s

      29,9 GB/s
      Max PCIe lanes

      16

      16
      TDP

      125 W

      95 W
      Suggested PSU

      650W ATX Power Supply

      600W ATX Power Supply
      GPU integrated graphics

      None

      None
      Socket

      AM3+

      AM3+
      Compatible motherboard

      Socket AM3+ Motherboard 

      Socket AM3+ Motherboard 
      Maximum temperature

      61°C

      70. 5°C
      Drystone MIPS

      97.114 DMIPS


      CPU-Z single thread

      231

      223
      CPU-Z multi thread

      1.597

      1.022
      Cinebench R15 single thread

      100

      95
      Cinebench R15 multi-thread

      669

      412
      Cinebench R23 single thread

      484

      495
      Cinebench R23 multi-thread

      3.355

      2.549
      PassMark single thread

      1.573

      1. 471
      PassMark CPU Mark

      5.944

      4.124
      (Windows 64-bit)
      Geekbench 4 single core

      2.738

      2.518
      (Windows 64-bit)
      Geekbench 4 multi-core

      10.978

      8.133
      (SGEMM)
      GFLOPS performance

      99,6 GFLOPS

      67,2 GFLOPS
      (Multi-core / watt performance)
      Performance / watt ratio

      88 pts / W

      86 pts / W
      Amazon


      eBay


      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.

      We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.

      Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.

      Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.

      The processor AMD FX-8350 has more cores, the maximum frequency of AMD FX-8350 is greater, that the thermal dissipation power of AMD FX-6300 is less. Both were produced in the same year.

      Performances :

      Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.





      CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score
      AMD FX-8350

      231

      1.597
      AMD FX-6300

      223

      1.022

      In single core, the difference is 4%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 56%.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
      average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

      CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.





      Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score
      AMD FX-8350

      100

      669
      AMD FX-6300

      95

      412

      In single core, the difference is 5%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 62%.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
      average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

      Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.





      Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score
      AMD FX-8350

      484

      3.355
      AMD FX-6300

      495

      2.549

      In single core, the difference is -2%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 32%.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
      average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

      Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.





      PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread
      AMD FX-8350

      1.573

      5.944
      AMD FX-6300

      1.471

      4.124

      In single core, the difference is 7%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 44%.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
      average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

      PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.

      On Windows 64-bit:





      Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit
      AMD FX-8350

      2.738

      10.978
      AMD FX-6300

      2.518

      8.133

      In single core, the difference is 9%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 35%.

      On Linux 64-bit:





      Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit
      AMD FX-8350

      2.755

      10.794
      AMD FX-6300

      2.676

      8.944

      In single core, the difference is 3%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 21%.

      On Android 64-bit:





      Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit
      AMD FX-6300

      2.217

      6.862
      AMD FX-8350

      2.233

      5.530

      In single core, the difference is 1%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 24%.

      On Mac OS X 64-bit:





      Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit
      AMD FX-8350

      2. 688

      11.071
      AMD FX-6300

      2.266

      8.231

      In single core, the difference is 19%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 35%.

      Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
      average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

      Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.

      Equivalence:

      AMD FX-8350 Intel equivalentAMD FX-6300 Intel equivalent

      Buy Lonely Mountains: Downhill — Microsoft Store en-TC

      Buy Lonely Mountains: Downhill — Microsoft Store en-TC







      Lonely Mountains: Downhill


      Thunderful Publishing


      Pick a gift
      Lonely Mountains: Downhill — USD$19. 99


      ‪Thunderful Publishing‬


      ‪Action & adventure‬, ‪Racing & flying‬, ‪Sports‬

      7+

      Mild Violence

      Just you and your bike — take it on a thrilling ride down an unspoiled mountain landscape. Make your way through thick forests, narrow trails and wild rivers. Race, jump, slide and try not to crash — all the way from the peak to the valley!

      USD$19.99+Offers in-app purchases

      Get access to this game and play with cloud gaming (where available) with an Xbox Game Pass Ultimate subscription (sold separately).Learn more

      + Offers in-app purchases

      Administrator approval required for installation. Minimum OS required: Windows 10 May 2019 Update.See system requirements

      USD$19.99+





      Overview
      System Requirements

      Included in


      Lonely Mountains: Downhill — Eldfjall Island


      USD$23. 49

      +


      Available on





      Xbox Series X|S




      Xbox One



      PC

      Capabilities

      Single player

      Xbox achievements

      Xbox presence

      Xbox cloud saves

      Xbox Play Anywhere

      Cloud enabled

      Screenshots


        {{#each slides}}



      • {{#each ImageForBreakPoints}}

        {{/each}}

      • {{/each}}


      {{/if}}




      Add-ons for this game







      System Requirements











      Minimum

      Your device must meet all minimum requirements to open this product
      OS Xbox,Windows 10 version 18362. 0 or higher
      Architecture x64
      Keyboard Integrated Keyboard
      DirectX Version 11
      Video Memory 2 GB
      Processor Intel Core i3-2100 / AMD FX-6300
      Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti / AMD Radeon HD 7870
      Notes 64-bit OS;Windows 7, 8, 10; Intel Core i3-2100 / AMD FX-6300;2 GB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti / AMD Radeon HD 7870;DirectX: Version 11











      Recommended

      Your device should meet these requirements for the best experience
      OS Xbox,Windows 10 version 18362. 0 or higher
      Architecture x64
      Keyboard Not specified
      DirectX Version 11
      Video Memory 4 GB
      Processor Intel Core i5-2100 / AMD FX-8350
      Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 / AMD Radeon R9
      Notes 64-bit OS;Windows 7, 8, 10; Intel Core i5-2100 / AMD FX-8350;4 GB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 / AMD Radeon R9;DirectX: Version 11









      Hardware Info — hardware reviews en vergelijken

      Tablets

      Review: OPPO Pad Air.

      Letterlijk en figuurlijk lichter dan Air

      1 uur geleden

      0 reacties

      Toetsenborden

      Review: Corsair K70 RGB Pro Mini. Luxe zestigprocent-gamingkeyboard met veel opties

      gisteren om 08:32

      3 reacties

      Smartphones

      Review: TCL 30 Plus. Een smartphone van 180 euro, en toch amoled en 50mp

      Kabels

      USB en Thunderbolt: de verschillende standaarden op een rijtje

      Speakers

      Review: Sonos Sub Mini.

      Klein maar fijn?

      Laptops

      Monitoren

      Televisies

      Videokaarten

      Routers

      Moederborden

      Smartphones

      Processors

      Systemen

      Productnieuws

      Tekle Holographics stelt ‘Holo-Wall’ ter beschikking aan nieuw Mediamuseum

      1 uur geleden
      0 reacties

      Sponsored

      Sponsored: Ontdek het IT-werk bij de Rijksoverheid: vaak verrassend, altijd belangrijk

      39 minuten geleden
      0 reacties

      Tablets

      Review: OPPO Pad Air.

      Letterlijk en figuurlijk lichter dan Air

      1 uur geleden
      0 reacties

      Besturingssystemen

      Microsoft Windows 8: conceptbeelden uit ontwikkelingsfase onthuld

      2 uur geleden
      0 reacties

      Moederborden

      Eerste B650-moederborden gespot bij retailer: minder goedkoop dan gehoopt

      gisteren om 20:04
      13 reacties

      Bedrijfsnieuws

      YouTube’s 2160p zou een Premium-functie kunnen gaan worden: Google test het in de app

      gisteren om 15:48
      24 reacties

      Overig nieuws

      FCC: oude satellieten nog maximaal vijf jaar in de ruimte, om gevaarlijk afval tegen te gaan

      gisteren om 14:40
      1 reactie

      Bedrijfsnieuws

      Intels Mobileye weer de beurs op, mogelijk gewaardeerd op 50 miljard dollar

      gisteren om 11:22
      2 reacties

      Smartphones

      Specs voor OnePlus’ 11R online: de 10R, maar dan met een Snapdragon 8+ Gen 1

      gisteren om 09:43
      0 reacties

      Toetsenborden

      Review: Corsair K70 RGB Pro Mini.

      Luxe zestigprocent-gamingkeyboard met veel opties

      gisteren om 08:32
      3 reacties

      Bedrijfsnieuws

      Gameontwikkelaars in de problemen: Google Stadia stopzetting kwam als complete verrassing

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 19:36
      13 reacties

      Alarmsystemen

      Ring lanceert buitencamera’s met 3D-bewegingsdetectie en een noodknop

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 15:42
      0 reacties

      Headsets en koptelefoons

      De Px8 is B&W’s ‘beste draadloze hoofdtelefoon ooit’, maar hij is wel duur

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 14:33
      20 reacties

      Moederborden

      Stickers op X670E RAM-slots slecht verwijderbaar: ASRock zegt sorry

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 11:12
      21 reacties

      De Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra «Ultra-Performance»

      Van der berg

      Corsair BOM

      fubu69

      i5 AlderGamert

      zjerique

      Polar Pacer Pro Blue

      Joris Schoenmaker

      Asus RoG Strix Z590-E Gaming WiFi

      Rooieduvel

      Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Pro

      Rooieduvel

      Levix Computershop
      HardwareWebwinkel.

      nl

      NieuwRetroGamer

      bol.com

      iemanddie

      Televisies

      Australische Aldi verkoopt Samsung smart-tv’s, onder de Bauhn-merknaam

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 09:36
      8 reacties

      Smartphones

      Review: TCL 30 Plus.

      Een smartphone van 180 euro, en toch amoled en 50mp

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 08:22
      11 reacties

      LED Lampen

      Met vallen én opstaan: Belgische slimme lamp helpt ouderen langer zelfstandig te zijn

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 08:22
      0 reacties

      Kabels

      USB en Thunderbolt: de verschillende standaarden op een rijtje

      zaterdag 01-10-2022 — 08:00
      22 reacties

      Speakers

      Edifier brengt S1000W ‘draadloze’ speakerset uit, met BT- en WiFi-ondersteuning

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 19:23
      18 reacties

      Productnieuws

      IKEA’s Obegränsad-serie voor muziekproducers morgen in de winkel: platenspeler kost 129 euro

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 18:17
      8 reacties

      Videokaarten

      Acer stopt blower- én reguliere fan in custom Intel Arc A770-videokaart

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 17:32
      6 reacties

      Besturingssystemen

      Printerproblemen keren terug in Windows 11 22h3

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 16:48
      4 reacties

      Smartphones

      Specs en foto’s Xiaomi’s 12T-smartphones online: 200 MP-camera voor de Pro – Update prijzen

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 16:14
      21 reacties

      Besturingssystemen

      Nieuwe malware infecteert wereldwijd verschillende architecturen en besturingssystemen

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 15:09
      3 reacties

      Kabels

      USB krijgt versimpelde naamgeving, maar er blijven uitzonderingen

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 14:36
      7 reacties

      Televisies

      IFA: LG Oled Flex-TV: van plat naar gebogen met één druk op de knop — Update prijs

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 13:53
      6 reacties

      Videokaarten

      Custom Nvidia RTX 4090-kaarten bij Finse retailer: van 1.

      999 tot 2.550 euro

      vrijdag 30-09-2022 — 12:11
      30 reacties

      AMD FX-6300 vs AMD FX-8350: What is the difference?

      Smartphone-graphic wire headphones

      40 Ballla

      AMD FX-6300

      35 BALLLA

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      64 Facts compared to

      AMD FX-8350 9000 AMD FX-8350 9000 9000 9000 AMD Is 6300 better than AMD FX-8350?

      • 9.5°C higher than maximum operating temperature?
        70.5°C vs 61°C
      • 30W below TDP?
        95W vs 125W
      • 1 newer PCI Express (PCIe) version?
        3 vs 2
      • 0.33MB/core more L3 cache per core?
        1.33MB/core vs 1MB/core
      • 15.19% higher PassMark result (overclocked)?
        7536 vs 6542
      • 58. 0 higher performance per watt?
        80.0 vs 22.0
      • 1 newer version of Turbo Core?
        3 vs 2

      Why is AMD FX-8350 better than AMD FX-6300?

      • 1.52x higher CPU speed?
        8 x 4GHz vs 6 x 3.5GHz
      • 2 more CPU threads?
        8 vs 6
      • 2MB more L2 cache?
        8MB vs 6MB
      • 43.66% higher PassMark score?
        5926 vs 4125
      • 96KB more L1 cache?
        384KB vs 288KB
      • 5.68% higher PassMark score (single)?
        1563 vs 1479

      Which comparisons are the most popular?

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      Intel Core i5-3470

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      AMD Ryzen 5 3600

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      Intel Core I5-457 AMD AMD FX-8350

      vs

      Intel Core i7-4770K

      AMD FX-6300

      9VS

      Intel Core i5-7400

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      AMD Ryzen 5 5600g

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      Intel Core i7-37770

      AMD FX-8350 9000 9000 AMD FXD FX-8350 9000

      AMD Phenom II X4 965

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      AMD Phenom II X4 955

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      AMD Ryzen 5 5500u

      AMD FX-6300

      VS 9000 VS 9000 AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD -7600

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      AMD FX-8320

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      AMD RYZEN 5 3600

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      Intel Core i7-3770

      9000 AMD FX-6300 9000 VS

      AMD RYZEN 5 5500U

      AMD FX-8350

      VS

      Intel Core i7-4770

      AMD FX-6300

      VS

      AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

      AMD FX-8350 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS 9000 VS

      Price comparison

      users reviews

      General rating

      AMD FX-6300

      2 Reviews of users

      AMD FX-6300

      /10

      2 Reviews of users

      AMD FX-8350

      5000 5 ° C 9000 5000 AMD FX-8350

      9. 8 /10

      5 Reviews of users

      Functions

      Price and quality ratio

      /10

      2 Votes

      9.6 /10

      5 Votes

      Games

      8.0 /10

      2 Votes

      /10

      5 Votes

      performance

      8.5 /10 9000 9000 Votes

      9.2 /10

      5 Votes

      Reliability

      8.5 /10

      2 VOTES

      /10

      5 VOTES

      Energy efficiency

      9000 7.5 /0003

      2 Votes

      8.6 /10

      5 Votes

      Productivity

      1. Ski -rustic processor

      6 x 3.5GHZ

      8 x 4GHZ

      The central processor speed shows how many processing cycles per second can perform a processor processor per second. , considering all its cores (processors). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.

      2nd processor thread

      More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.

      3.speed turbo clock

      4.1GHz

      4.2GHz

      When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

      4. Unlocked

      ✔AMD FX-6300

      ✔AMD FX-8350

      Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and can be easily overclocked for better performance in games and other applications.

      5.L2 cache

      More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

      6.L3 cache

      More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

      7.L1 cache

      More L1 cache results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

      8.core L2

      1MB/core

      1MB/core

      More data can be stored in L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

      9.core L3

      1.33MB/core

      1MB/core

      More data can be stored in the L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

      Memory

      1.RAM speed

      1866MHz

      1866MHz

      Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

      2.max memory bandwidth

      21GB/s

      21GB/s

      This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

      3.DDR version

      DDR (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory) is the most common type of RAM. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient.

      4.Memory channels

      More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.

      5.max memory

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Maximum amount of memory (RAM).

      6.baud rate bus

      5.4GT/s

      5.4GT/s

      The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.

      7.Supports memory troubleshooting code

      ✖AMD FX-6300

      ✖AMD FX-8350

      The memory error recovery code can detect and repair data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

      8.eMMC version

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      A newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory card — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB.

      9. bus frequency

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device

      Geotagging

      1. PassMark result

      This test measures processor performance using multi-threading.

      2. PassMark result (single)

      This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.

      3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures multi-core processor performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

      4. Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Cinebench R20 is a benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.

      5.Cinebench R20 result (single core)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene.

      6.Geekbench 5 result (single core)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the single-core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

      7. Blender test result (bmw27)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

      8.Blender result (classroom)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

      9.performance per watt

      This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.

      Functions

      1.uses multithreading

      ✖AMD FX-6300

      ✖AMD FX-8350

      Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides better performance by dividing each physical processor core into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.

      2. Has AES

      ✔AMD FX-6300

      ✔AMD FX-8350

      AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

      3. Has AVX

      ✔AMD FX-6300

      ✔AMD FX-8350

      AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.

      4.Version SSE

      SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

      5. Has F16C

      ✔AMD FX-6300

      ✔AMD FX-8350

      F16C is used to speed up tasks such as image contrast adjustment or volume control.

      6.bits transmitted at the same time

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.

      7. Has MMX

      ✔AMD FX-6300

      ✔AMD FX-8350

      MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting image contrast or adjusting volume.

      8.Has TrustZone

      ✖AMD FX-6300

      ✖AMD FX-8350

      Technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and streaming video using Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology .

      9.interface width

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-6300)

      Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD FX-8350)

      The processor can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), which means that the processor performs better

      Price comparison

      Cancel

      Which CPUs are better?

      FX 6300 vs FX 8350 with RX 580 8Gb. 6 cores or 8 cores in modern games? Tests & comparisons

      Comparing the performance of a six-core FX6300 with an eight-core FX8350. Battle FX 6300 vs FX 8350!

      Purpose of comparing FX 6300 vs FX 8350

      We will compare processors at a fixed frequency of 4.2GHz. Where the FX6300 will be overclocked to 4.2GHz and the FX8350 is fixed at that frequency.

      This test will allow us to compare the actual performance of two crystals at the same frequency. Instead of to do boring comparisons in a default. Moreover, using FX in default in 2020 is already somehow strange if you can spend two hours of time and increase performance by up to 40%.

      AMD FX 6300 overclocking and how to overclock FX 8350 read on the website.

      Let’s also compare two processors in overclocked states. FX 8350 overclocked to 4.7GHz. And this test will be especially useful for those who want to make a small upgrade of the system without changing the motherboard socket.

      Let’s see what 2 additional cores will give us in the older FX line. To begin with, I would like to compare the technical characteristics of the processors.

      Video cards for a processor or a processor for a video card, for the most balanced system. Up to 4.2GHz TOTAL L1 CACHE 288KB 384KB TOTAL L2 CACHE 6MB 8MB TOTAL L3 CACHE 8MB 8MB CMOS 32nm SOI 32nm SOI TDP 95W 125W MAX TEMPS 70. 50°C 61°C

    • Basic frequency
    • Maximum frequency
    • L1 cache
    • L2 cache
    • TDP
    • Maximum temperature
    • Frequency NB

    Two module. However, disabling two cores on a chip did not affect the size of the L3 cache, it has 8mb as a full-fledged Vishera.

    Crystal FX 6300

    However, the L2 cache, which in the Pildriver microarchitecture is individual for each pair of cores, is smaller in the FX6300 and consists of three 2-MB parts. Those. its total volume is 6mb versus 8mb for eight-core FX8350. Crystal FX 6300. L2 cache

    Another difference of Vishera’s six-core modification is the reduced northbridge frequency to 2000MHz versus 2200MHz for FX8350.

    But the maximum temperature of the FX6300 is 10 degrees higher and amounts to 70.5 degrees, which gives a potentially greater overclocking maneuver.

    How to check if the video card is working.

    Characteristics of systems after overclocking

    In our test, the frequency of NB, RAM, and processor cores will be the same. The difference will be in the number of cores, L1 cache, L2 cache, and the amount of RAM.

    Yes, the FX8350 will have 16 Gb of RAM on board and this will be another advantage over the FX6300’s 8 Gb.

    Keep this in mind when evaluating performance. I will point out at what points a smaller amount of RAM can play a role.

    It’s time to see what the FX6300 is capable of, but before that, some test configurations.

    System configuration with six core FX 6300

    • Processor : AMD FX 6300
    • Motherboard : Asus M5A97 LE R2.0
    • Cooling system : AMD Wraith Prism. 125 ТDP
    • RAM : Kingston HyperX Fury 2 sticks 4 GB dual channel
    • SSD : Kingston A400 240Gb under Windows10
    • 9002 Western1 Digital HDD Spindle speed 7200, cache 64mb. For games

    • Video card : RX 580 8GB Sapphire Nitro+

    System configuration with eight core FX 8350

    • Processor : AMD FX 8350
    • Motherboard : Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P
    • Cooling system : be quet! Dark Rock Pro 4, 250 TDP.
    • RAM : Kingston HyperX Fury 2 sticks 8 GB dual channel
    • Solid state drive : Kingston A400 240Gb for Windows10
    • Hard drive 906 Blue11. Spindle speed 7200, cache 64mb. Under games
    • Video card : Sapphire RX 580 Nitro+. 8Gb video memory

    Tested games:

    We will test the difference between the FX 6300 and FX8350 in 6 popular games, from different developers with different optimization of games for hardware:

    1. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018) by Ubisoft Quebec Battlefield V (2018) by DICE
    2. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) by Nixxes Software and Crystal Dynamics

      • 1%Low — 24 FPS
      • AVG — 32 FPS

      The FX 6300 beat the FX 8350 by 4.35% in rare events. The result is within the margin of error. In terms of average FPS, the FX 6300 outperformed an octa-core processor by 9. 38%.

      The FX6300 is slightly ahead of the FX8350, but the FX 6300 is loaded more heavily during gameplay. Although the difference is minor.

      But for 2013 processors, this is a good indicator at maximum settings, in one of the most demanding games.

      Battlefield v

      Comparison FX 6300 (4.2) C FX 8350 (4.2) in Battlefield V

      AMD FX 6300:

      • 1%LOW — 29 FPS
      • AVG — 52 FPS

      AMD FX

      • 1%Low — 41 FPS
      • AVG — 63 FPS

      In rare events 1%Low, the FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 41.38%. In terms of average FPS, the FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 21.16%.

      In Battlefield V, the octa-core processor performs better on both medium and rare events.

      This FX 6300 game lacks additional RAM. Perhaps with her presence, he would close the gap.

      In this game, the processors are loaded almost under 100%, and it is in such cases that the FX 8350 will always show the best performance.

      Shadow of the Tomb Raider

      FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Shadow of the Tomb Raider

      AMD FX 6300:

      • 1%Low — 932 FPS

        9

      • AMD FX 8350:

        • 1%Low — 57 FPS
        • AVG — 69 FPS

        In terms of minimum events, the FX 8350 almost doubled the FX 6300, which amounted to 78.15%. about the average FPS, the gap was an impressive 18.97%.

        Shadow of the Tomb Raider has 100% CPU utilization. And FX 8350 shows the best performance.

        This FX 6300 game clearly lacks RAM. With more of it, perhaps the gap would be smaller.

        The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

        Compare FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

        AMD FX 6300:

        • 1%Low — 33 FPS
        • AVG — 08

          AMD FX 8350:

          • 1%Low — 32 FPS
          • AVG — 52 FPS

          In Witcher 3, processors are almost parity in rare events. The FX 6300 outperforms the older model by 3. 13%. The result is within the margin of error. And in terms of average FPS, it is no longer an impressive 11.54%.

          The Witcher 3 completely repeats the situation in Assassin’s Creed. The FX6300 is loaded more than the FX 8350 and produces better results. Most likely it’s the optimization of these games.

          An overclocked FX8350 will not change this picture.

          Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

          Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

          AMD FX 6300:

          • 1%Low — 34 FPS
          • AVG 60 — AVG 60 — AVG 60 — AVG

          AMD FX 8350:

          • 1%Low — 42 FPS
          • AVG — 61 FPS

          In this game, the gap is very small. The FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 23.53% in rare events, while processors have parity in average events.

          In Jedi Fallen Order, processors are almost parity. Although, in terms of processor load, the FX 6300 was loaded more during the test period.

          Hitman 2

          Compare FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Hitman 2

          AMD FX 6300:

          • 1%Low — 24 FPS
          • AVG — 48 FPS

          AMD FX 8350:

          • 1%Low — 35 FPS
          • AVG — 58 FPS average FPS. The FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 45.84% in rare events and 20.84% ​​in average events.

            Hitman has excellent optimization for multithreading, and here both processors are loaded almost at 100%. But the FX 8350 performs better in both medium and rare events.

            In this game, perhaps 8Gb of memory is not enough for the FX 6300. And the gap could be reduced a little.

            Fixed Rate Test Conclusions

            The test results show that the main advantage of the eight-core processor is the higher 1% Low readings. It is this indicator that directly affects the smoothness of the game. The average FPS is close to that of the FX 6300.

            Keep in mind that the FX 6300 is overclocked, while the FX 8350 is fixed at its rated frequencies, the memory subsystem on all processors has identical overclocking values.

            It is possible that with a large amount of RAM, exactly 1% Low would be higher for a six-core processor, but unfortunately it has what we have.

            Let’s see what the FX 8350 can show if we add 500 MHz to the cores.

            FX 6300 (4.2GHZ) VS FX 8350 (4.7GHZ)

            Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

            Comparison FX 6300 (4.2) C FX 8350 (4.7) in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

            9000

            2 9000 AMD FX 6300: 9010 AMD FX — 23 FPS

          • AVG — 35 FPS

          AMD FX 8350:

          • 1% LOW — 26 FPS
          • AVG — 38 FPS

          FX 8350 went around the FX 6300 on the 1% LOW and 8.58% in terms of the average FPS.

          Battlefield v

          Comparison FX 6300 (4.2) C FX 8350 (4.7) in Battlefield V

          AMD FX 6300:

          • 1%LOW — 29 FPS

          902 90,

          9, 9000 AMD

          • 1%Low — 36 FPS
          • AVG — 63 FPS
          • The

          FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 24.14% in 1%Low and 21. 16% in average FPS.

          Shadow of the Tomb Raider

          Comparison FX 6300 (4.2) C FX 8350 (4.7) in Battlefield v

          AMD FX 6300:

          • 1%Low — 32 FPS
          • AVG — 58 FPS 9000 9000 9000 9000 FX 8350:

            • 1%Low — 50 FPS
            • AVG — 68 FPS

            The FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 56.25% in 1%Low and 17.25% in average FPS.

            The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

            Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

            AMD FX 6300:

            • 1%Low — 33 FPS
            • 90 —

            AMD FX 8350:

            • 1%Low — 34 FPS
            • AVG — 52 FPS

            FX 8350 bypassed FX 6300 by 1%LOW, but in terms by 11.54%.

            Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

            Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

            AMD FX 6300:

            • 1%LOW — 34 FPS
            • AVG — 60 FPS

            AMD FX 8350:

                Low — 52 FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                FPS

                The 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 52. 95% in 1%Low and 6.67% in average FPS.

                Hitman 2

                Comparison FX 6300 (4.2) C FX 8350 (4.7) in Hitman 2

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%LOW — 24 FPS
                • AVG — 48 FPS

                9000 AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 31 FPS
                • AVG — 55 FPS

                The FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 29.17% in 1%Low and by 14.59% in average FPS.

                Conclusions

                In general, the result is predictable. Two additional cores and an increased L1 and L2 cache in modern games give a significant boost both in the minimum and in the average events.

                With an overclocked memory subsystem, the eight-core FX, in my opinion, shows excellent results at ultra settings in modern and demanding games, especially in those that are better optimized for a lot of thread. Without emphasis on the video card, we would have seen other numbers.

                Games are getting better and better at using a lot of thread, and 8 cores are already showing much better results than 6 cores.

                In the video on overclocking the FX8350 by bus and multiplier with the RX5700XT video card, you will see these results.

                As for the FX6300, this processor held its own, and in two very demanding games it showed even better results, especially considering its used price. market at $45-50 as of 2020.

                It remains the current gaming processor at medium settings in FULL HD, capable of delivering the reference 60 FPS.

                Watch us on Yotube:

                Comparison AMD FX-6300 vs AMD FX-8350 which is better?

                General

                Type

                Desktop Desktop

                Architecture code name

                Vishera Vishera

                Cores

                A large number of cores improves performance in multi-threaded applications.
                At the moment, increasing the number of processor cores is one of the priorities for increasing performance.

                6 8

                2 (33.3%) better than

                Threads

                More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases).

                6 8

                2 (33.3%) better than

                Base frequency

                3.5GHz 4 GHz

                Better than

                at 0.5 GHz (14.3%)

                Process

                32 nm 32 nm

                Chip size

                315 mm2 315 mm2

                Number of transistors

                1 million 1 million

                Maximum frequency

                Faster clocked processors perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance.

                3. 8GHz 4.2 GHz

                At 0.4 GHz (10.5%) better than

                Support 64 bit

                Max. number of processors per configuration

                1 1

                Socket

                AM3+ AM3+

                AMD-V

                Series

                n/a AMD FX-Series (Desktop)

                Value for money

                The sum of all the advantages of the device divided by its price. The more%, the better the quality per unit price in comparison with all analogues.

                95.1% 96.1%

                1% (1.1%) better than

                Maximum core temperature

                71 °C 61°C

                -10 °C (-14. 1%) better than

                PCI Express revision

                3.0 n/a

                FMA

                + +

                Voltage P0 Vcore

                Min: 1.15 V — Max: 1.3875 V Min: 1.2 V — Max: 1.4 V

                Level 1 Cache

                The fastest level of cache that works directly with the core. The larger the cache, the better the performance.

                288 Kb no data

                Level 2 cache

                6144 KB 8192 Kb

                Level 3 cache

                8192 KB n/a

                Free multiplier

                Power consumption (TDP)

                Calculated heat output shows the average heat output during load operation,
                the larger the value, the more the requirements for cooling and power consumption increase.

                95 W

                -30 W (-24%) better than

                125W
                Technologies and additional instructions

                AES-NI

                A technology from Intel that speeds up the AES encryption process.

                + +

                AVX

                The presence of AVX instructions improves performance in floating point and processor-intensive operations
                applications.

                Virtualization technologies
                Comparative analysis of AMD FX-8350 and AMD FX-6300 processors according to all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Peripherals, Technologies, Virtualization.
                Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).

                AMD FX-8350

                versus

                AMD FX-6300

                Advantages

                Reasons to select AMD FX-8350

                • The processor is unlocked, an unlocked multiplier allows you to easily make an overclocking
                • more, the ability to run more applications at the same time: 8 VS 6
                • 2 threads more: 8 vs 6
                • About 11% more clock speed: 4.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz
                • L1 cache is about 33% larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
                • L2 cache is about 33% larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
                • Performance in PassMark — Single thread mark benchmark approximately 6% more: 1577 vs 1489
                • Approximately 44% greater PassMark — CPU mark performance: 5999 vs 4176
                • Approximately 7% greater performance in Geekbench 4 — Single Core: 566 vs 527
                • About 44% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core benchmark: 2751 vs 1914
                • About 49% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score benchmark: 3132 vs 2098
                • Performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face benchmark Detection (mPixels/s) about 43% more: 9.886 vs 6.905
                • Performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) about 35% more: 21.912 vs 16.195
                • CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) about 25% faster performance: 0.424 vs 0.339
                • CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) about 41% faster performance: 1.199 vs 0.85
                • Performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) about 50% better: 7.137 vs 4.767
                Unlocked Unlocked / Locked
                Number of cores 8 vs 6
                Number of threads 8 vs 6
                Maximum frequency 4.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz
                Level 1 cache 384 KB vs 288 KB
                Level 2 cache 8MB vs 6MB
                PassMark — Single thread mark 1577 vs 1489
                PassMark — CPU mark 5999 vs 4176
                Geekbench 4 — Single Core 566 vs 527
                Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 2751 vs 1914
                3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score 3132 vs 2098
                CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 9.886 vs 6.905
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 21.912 vs 16.195
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.424 vs 0.339
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 1.199 vs 0.85
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 7.137 vs 4.767

                reasons to select AMD FX-6300

                • about 16% more nucleus: 70.50 ° C VS 61 ° C
                • are approximately 32% less energy consumption: 95 WATT VS 125 WATT
                906 906 906 9 core temperature
                70. 50°C vs 61°C
                Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt vs 125 Watt

                Benchmark comparison

                CPU 1: AMD FX-8350
                CPU 2: AMD FX-6300

                PassMark — Single thread mark
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                PassMark — CPU mark
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                Geekbench 4 — Single Core
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                Geekbench 4 — Multi Core
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                21.912
                16.195
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)
                CPU 1
                CPU 2
                Name AMD FX-8350 AMD FX-6300
                PassMark — Single thread mark 1577 1489
                PassMark — CPU mark 5999 4176
                Geekbench 4 — Single Core 566 527
                Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 2751 1914
                3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score 3132 2098
                CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 9.886 6.905
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 21.912 16.195
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.424 0.339
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 1.199 0.85
                CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 7.137 4.767

                Feature comparison

                AMD FX-8350 AMD FX-6300
                Architecture name Vishera Vishera
                Family AMD FX-Series Processors AMD FX-Series Processors
                Issue date October 23, 2012 October 2012
                OPN PIB FD8350FRHKBOX FD6300WMHKBOX
                OPN Tray FD8350FRW8KHK FD6300WMW6KHK
                Place in the rating 1723 1981
                Price now $79. 99 $58.99
                Series AMD FX 8-Core Black Edition Processors AMD FX 6-Core Black Edition Processors
                Price/performance ratio (0-100) 32.95 31.81
                Applicability Desktop Desktop
                Support 64 bit
                Base frequency 4 GHz 3.5 GHz
                Crystal area 315 mm 315 mm
                Level 1 cache 384KB 288KB
                Level 2 cache 8MB 6MB
                Level 3 cache 8MB 8MB
                Process 32nm SOI 32nm SOI
                Maximum core temperature 61°C 70. 50°C
                Maximum frequency 4.2 GHz 3.8 GHz
                Number of cores 8 6
                Number of threads 8 6
                Voltage P0 Vcore Min: 1.2 V — Max: 1.4 V Min: 1.15V — Max: 1.3875V
                Number of transistors 1200 Million 1200 million
                Unlocked
                Supported memory frequency 1866 MHz 1866 MHz
                Supported memory types DDR3 DDR3
                Maximum number of processors per configuration 1 1
                Supported sockets AM3+ AM3+
                Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt
                PCI Express Revision n/a 3. 0
                Fused Multiply-Add (FMA)
                Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX)
                Intel® AES New Instructions
                Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4)
                AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™)

                AMD FX-6300 CPU Test in 20 Games in 2022: Just Add Overclocking! GECID.com.

                ::>Processors
                >2022
                > AMD FX-6300 CPU test in 20 games in 2022: just add overclocking!

                21-07-2022

                This time it’s the turn of the 6-core AMD FX-6300. Let’s see if it turns into a beast after a full overclock, including the northbridge and RAM, and then how it will pull 20 games and how many of them will be in the green zone? Go!

                We managed to get such a processor from our friends — the Tera-flops.com.ua online store. If you want to build a computer from used components, you should start here. Also pay attention to the Trade-In program, which will allow you to organize an upgrade inexpensively.

                The AMD FX-6300 was born back in 2012. That is, he is almost 10 years old! The «old man» was positioned as a budget gaming processor.

                Inside 6 Vishera cores of the Piledriver microarchitecture on a large, by modern standards, 32 nm process technology. “Stone” works in 6 threads, and TDP is at level 95 W. Compared to the previously tested AMD FX-4300, the FX-6300 has twice the L3 cache at 8MB. But the maximum frequency is 200 MHz lower — only 3.8 GHz.

                We got acquainted, now we’ll tell you how he got a job with us. We tried to create the most comfortable conditions for grandfather.

                The AsRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer motherboard provided the Socket AM3+ platform. This is a gaming model that supports overclocking. And it’s good, it suits our plans.

                We’re a little worried about processor cooling, because we don’t have an air conditioner, and it’s July! That’s why they hid the FX under the dropsy Corsair iCUE h250i Elite Capellix RGB. The cooling plate has 128 micro-fins for every 2.5 cm of area for the most efficient heat dissipation from the CPU cover.

                The 16 GB RAM was loaded with two G.Skill Trident X DDR3-2400 sticks. In stock, it ran at 1600 MHz and overclocked at 2400 MHz with timings of 10-12-12-31.

                So that the system would not even think to run into the capabilities of the video card, we took pure red power — Sapphire Radeon RX 6900 XT NITRO + SE. She has excellent cooling and 16 GB of video memory.

                We thank the Telemart. ua online store for it, where now there is not only a huge selection of new components, but also many services are provided: from assembly and diagnostics to upgrade, cleaning with replacement of thermal paste, and even transferring information for PCs and laptops . The latter is only in the showrooms of Kyiv, Dnipro, Lvov and Kharkov, and soon expect in other cities. Ask for additional services from managers, on the hotline or on social networks.

                Installed the system and related applications on a 960 GB Patriot BURST SATA SSD. Most of the games ran from the 2TB Patriot Burst Elite SSD. «Dvoechka» perfectly replaces the HDD for us. It is quite affordable, as for a «solid state», capacious and everything is fine with her temperature. Even during our active multi-hour tests.

                Corsair RM750x White at 750 watts provided the «gold power» to the system. This means that there will be no excess heat, and the Zero RPM fan will take care of the acoustic comfort — just what we need.

                The Corsair 5000D Tempered Glass White case sheltered all our goodness, and also left some free space. For example, 4 2.5-inch SSDs can be hidden behind the board tray. And in the most prominent place of the control panel, all the necessary ports are collected, including USB 3.1 Type-C.

                Do you know what else, besides the quiet operation of the system, allows us to catch 0.1% low and minor gameplay flaws? Gaming mouse — Endgame XM1R Dark Frost. It has a translucent body, pleasant to the touch and fast Kailh switches, a Pixart sensor with a sensitivity of up to 19000dpi. In turn, the Endgame MPC-450 Cordura mat provided easy sliding.

                So, are you ready to see the real power of the AMD FX-6300? After overclocking, he is like Danny Chain Dog, who has been stripped of his collar and thrown into battle.

                With our hardware, the most stable result was obtained with the following settings:

                • XMP profile with a frequency of 2400 MHz was chosen for memory overclocking;
                • the processor frequency was raised by a multiplier to 23. 5, which gave 4700 MHz — plus 24%;
                • the voltage on the cores was fixed at around 1.5 V;
                • , the north bridge frequency was increased to 2600 MHz, and the HT bus to 2400 MHz.

                After that AMD FX-6300 was completely stable. The case and cooling worked out, as the book says — the CPU temperature does not exceed 60 ° C while simultaneously loading the cores and the GPU. And most importantly, the 10-year-old hero of the video got a second wind after such a complex overclocking. Whatever the test, then the joy!

                In synthetics, the main breakthrough came with CineBench R23. Plus 36% in a single-core load and an unrealistic 66% in a multi-core one.

                Geekbench was also soooo happy about the 6-core upgrade, which gave out plus 27% in a single thread and plus 31% when loading all the “nuts under the lid”.

                Well, the most «modest» result was shown by the CPU-Z benchmark. The result improved by 29% and 22% in different types of load.

                Although, if you look at games in Full HD resolution, you can conclude that all synthetics showed a modest result.

                And for starters in Cyberpunk 2077 on the low chart. Very rare events have improved just … twice. Rare events — by 72%, and the average frequency — by 43%. As a result, the video sequence has changed dramatically for the better.

                Forza Horizon 5 at low settings also does not hesitate to show «profit»: from 40 to 62% bonus to frame rate.

                And finally Assassin’s Creed Valhalla has at low settings and full render scale. FPS increased by 39-55%.

                Well, the AMD FX-6300 was born to be overclocked. Of course, if the rest of the system components allow it and also support key parameters with a boost. In our case, we managed to squeeze out + 28% in work tasks and from 41 to 73% on average in gaming benchmarks.

                It is also interesting to draw parallels with the AMD FX-4300, which also overclocked perfectly, even 200 MHz higher — up to 4. 9 GHz. So, if we compare these processors in overclocking, it turns out that the AMD FX-6300 is better by 10% in synthetics and by 28-90% in games. That’s the benefit of twice the L3 cache and 2 extra cores, even at a lower frequency.

                I can’t wait to find out what’s in real games. After all, benchmarks are benchmarks, and all the jambs and small blunts are felt only when our tester sits down at the computer and launches two dozen projects.

                We start with Apex Legends at maximum graphics settings. In the first match, or rather, the first few minutes, there may be slowdowns or even freezes. But as soon as all the data settles down in memory cells, the gameplay stabilizes at medium 109k / s. In this case, the rate of very rare events can drop to 41 fps, and on more complex maps, for example, «Olympus», and even up to 26. But in general, everything is fine after all the additional downloads, it is played comfortably.

                Assassin Creed: Valhalla testing again with ultra graphics. In past videos, the younger AMD FX-4300 and Athlon X4 860K with these settings were playable only with a frame rate limit of 30 fps. Otherwise, the «Persian» sometimes hung in the air. And now look how beautiful it is — an average of almost 60 fps and a fairly smooth video sequence. That’s what 6 cores are doing!

                Battlefield 2042 takes the heat of ultra-nano-luxury graphics down to earth like the Stinger K52. In Conquest mode for 128 players, this game, as well as with low-end processors, is still unplayable. Here is a complete set of problems with control and smoothness of the picture. The processor is loaded to the brim, and the GPU, on the contrary, is resting. Therefore, we send this game to our red list. However, if you really want to, you can try your luck — for example, a mode with fewer players or limit fps at the level of the video card driver.

                СoD: Warzone tells us — «Hey man, forget about that Battle, I’m good, here’s the maximum graphics for you — play for your health. » Any shortcomings disappear even at the warm-up stage and you can break into the rink already at an average of 56 fps. Something insignificant can sometimes disturb, but in general — nothing critical. We put this game on the green list. Finally, let’s count.

                Just for fun, we tried to reset the graphics to a low level, while leaving anti-aliasing, ultra-shadows and textures. Such a big sacrifice in the picture provided only a couple of fps bonuses — it was 56 on average, and now it’s 59. So don’t. If the video card allows, it is better to squeeze all the juice out of the picture.

                Unfortunately, the 6-core AMD FX-6300 did not allow Cyberpunk 2077 graphics to be raised to the minimum settings. Probably, this will already be the lot of the 8-core AMD FX-8350. Yes, the gameplay is still not perfect, because in saturated locations there are drawdowns below 30 fps, and 0.1% Low does not look very good. BUT! Much more pleasant to play than with the younger Athlon and FX. Management is obedient, and smoothness … if you get out of the car and stop catching locations saturated with polygons and the sun, smoothness is enough to normally complete the game. Especially if you enable FSR in the settings. So we move Cyberpunk from the yellow zone to the green one. Do you support such a decision? Unsubscribe in the comments, who went through Cyberpunk on old processors and which ones?


                Deathloop puts the AMD FX-6300 back on the high graphics track. An average of 44 fps and a relatively comfortable gameplay. The only thing to consider is that in some places there are drawdowns in the 30 fps zone.

                Dying Light 2 also pleases with high resolution. Traditionally, for retro processors, you need to give time to chew and digest. Well, after the game goes perfectly, with smooth visuals and sensitive controls. On average, the counter counted 108 fps and very rare events in the 45 zone.

                Dota 2 scared me at first with very high graphics. I had to look at her for a long time. Close, eyes on the screen. Now, these first slowdowns did not want to pass — 3 minutes, 5, 8 — she did not like something. And only after 10 minutes finally calmed down and went as it should. So don’t panic right away. On average, there are decent 70 fps and sagging up to 50 in especially heavy battles.

                Escape by Tarkov and ultra graphics. What can I say — you enjoy the picture and calmly wander around the gardens in search of loot or a crazy ball. An average of 66 fps and no serious comments.

                Far Cry 6 and, for a minute, ultra graphics. As for a shooter, smoothness may be quite a bit lacking, but not to say that this causes big problems. In addition, management is obedient. On average, the counter produces 43 fps, which can be considered a decent result for a 2012 processor in a late 2021 game. A difference of 10 years after all.

                Forza Horizon 5 we have a generous soul in general — she easily agreed to extreme graphics settings and flew away without unnecessary emotions. Everything you need from racing is here — smoothness, wasd sensitivity and a pleasant view from the driver’s seat. If he could take his eyes off the road and look into the upper left corner of the monitoring, he would see stable above 70 fps there.

                Fortnite and epic graphics settings in the DX12 API. Sometimes small freezes and twitches occur throughout the match. And all of our life hacks like limiting the frame rate or resetting the settings do not cure them. But, again, still nothing critical. It is played quite comfortably at an average of 88 fps.

                God of War also does not limit the AMD FX-6300’s desire to show a good picture. On the record, everything is very good, but when playing in real life, constant small twitches are felt. Limiting the frame rate to 40 fps helps to improve the situation.

                Multiplayer Halo is also set to ultra and again we recommend to activate the frame rate limiter. Of course, if you are not an AMD FX-6300 esports player. Thus, from 78 fps we fix on average at 60, which reduces the load on the CPU from 100% to the range of 50-80%. The sinking is about the same, but the gameplay loses small twitches and becomes much smoother.

                Hitman 3 normally walks and shoots with high and sometimes very beautiful graphics. In general, everything is good and smooth, with rare drawdowns in the 30 fps region in large spaces such as these.

                PUBG raced on ultra graphics. Here, too, subtle matter in the perception of gameplay. On the one hand, the counter pleases with a value of under a hundred, and the processor itself is far from this in terms of loading. But on the other hand, when playing live, you feel constant twitches. By the way, with folk settings, the same thing, despite the bonus of 10-15 fps. In general, comfort is relative, so this game is the only one we send to the yellow list. After all, who might not like this gameplay in the genre of the royal battle.

                Maximum graphics and Resident Evil 8: Village . The gameplay is quite comfortable. But you need to be prepared for periodic light subfreezes, which are a bit of an eyesore. For some reason, they are not fixed by limiting the frequency or lowering the graphics.

                Incredibly forked out and Rust , allowing us to play on the maximum graphics. Here, too, sometimes there are these small slowdowns. True, the game has very wide possibilities for customization, definitely exceeding our time reserves. So suddenly they will get bored — you can dig deeper, as in the old Lanos after 200 thousand. Well, if not, we enjoy the top picture at an average of 60 fps.

                Now, if you can single out a game that pleases with its stability, this is Rainbow Six: Siege . Ultra graphics, full render resolution and 153 fps on average. Even very rare events do not fall below 76.

                And finally, the 20th final game — Warframe with an improved engine and high graphics. Here, defects in the video sequence occur rarely, do not accumulate in the subcortex and do not lead to a nervous breakdown. But seriously, it plays well with average 109k / s and obedient control.

                Conclusions

                Conclusions, friends. This is another old, almost 10-year-old processor from AMD and so far the coolest one we’ve tested in this series. Judge for yourself — it has 6 cores in 6 threads, which offer an excellent bonus of 28 to 90% in games compared to the 4-core FX-4300.

                As it turned out, the «grandfather» has an excellent overclocking potential, or rather, it gives a significant effect from this overclocking. Especially in combination with the frequency boost of the northbridge, Hyper Transport bus and RAM. In some games, the performance is doubled.

                Well, the main thing is our count. Now, only one game is left on the bench: Battlefield 2042’s 128-player online mode. In addition, PUBG was marked by micro-twitching, which can annoy someone.

                Otherwise, AMD FX-6300 in an overclocked system coped very well with 18 current games, many of which we launched with maximum graphics settings. Therefore, if this processor is already in your system, definitely think about overclocking and adding a more powerful video card.

                And if you manage to assemble or upgrade a budget PC based on AM3+ from used components, take a closer look at the FX-6300 family — there are also FX-6330 and FX-6350, which differ only in frequencies. Although no! Wait for another test of the 8-core AMD FX-8350. We will also do this material soon.

                Author: Denis Koziolek
                Translation: Lilia Masyuk 9000
                We also suggest reading:
                Test AMD Athlon X4 860K in 20 games in 2022. 8 year old CPU in modern games?
                AMD FX-4300 processor test in 20 games in 2022. 10 years of hard work!
                Intel Core i3-3225 test in 2022: DDR3-1600 already decides?

                Fx 8350 with gtx 1660 super. test 7 games in full hd

                FX 6300 (4.2GHz) vs FX 8350 (4.7GHz)

                Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

                Compare FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 23 FPS
                • AVG — 35 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 26 FPS
                • AVG — 38 FPS

                The FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 13.05% in 1%Low and by 8.58% in average FPS.

                Battlefield V

                FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Battlefield V

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 29 FPS
                • AVG — 52 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 36 FPS
                • AVG — 63 FPS
                • The

                FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 24.14% in 1%Low and 21.16% in average FPS.

                Shadow of the Tomb Raider

                FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Battlefield V

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 32 FPS
                • AVG — 58 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 50 FPS
                • AVG — 68 FPS
                • The

                FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 56.25% in 1%Low and 17.25% in average FPS.

                The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 33 FPS
                • AVG — 58 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 34 FPS
                • AVG — 52 FPS

                The FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 3.06% in 1%Low, but in terms of average FPS, the FX 6300 outperformed the FX8350 by 11.54%.

                Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 34 FPS
                • AVG — 60 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 52 FPS
                • AVG — 64 FPS

                The FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 52. 95% in 1%Low and by 6.67% in average FPS.

                Hitman 2

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.7) in Hitman 2

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 24 FPS
                • AVG — 48 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 31 FPS
                • AVG — 55 FPS
                • The

                FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 29.17% in 1%Low and by 14.59% in average FPS.

                Tested games:

                We will test the difference between the FX 6300 and FX8350 in 6 popular games from different developers with different optimization of games for hardware:

                1. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018) by Ubisoft Quebec
                2. Battlefield V (2018) by DICE
                3. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) by Nixxes Software and Crystal Dynamics
                4. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2015) by CD Projekt RED
                5. Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order (2019) by Respawn Entertainment
                6. Hitman 2 (2018) by IO Interactive

                Graphics settings are maxed out. FULL HD resolution, 1920×1080.

                Also keep in mind that when recording Radeon Relive, about 3-5 frames are lost. In the game, the readings will be better.

                Well, let’s move on to the tests …

                Selection criteria: how to choose the right processor and what you need to pay attention to

                Below are the main characteristics of the processor, on which its performance depends (also the main characteristics will help you make the right choice):

                Bit depth — expressed by the maximum amount of information in bits that can be simultaneously transmitted and processed. The bitness of the processor is characterized by the bitness of the register. For example, with a register width of 2 bytes, the processor width will be 16 bits (that is, 2×8). There are 16, 32 and 54 bit architectures. Accordingly, the larger it is, the higher the performance;
                Speed ​​- the average value of operations performed by the processor per second. Speed ​​is also referred to as computing power;
                The clock frequency is the length of time between the current clock pulse and the start of the next pulse. Clock frequency is measured in clock cycles (MHz) per second. The minimum clock frequency is 40 MHz, the maximum is 3 GHz;
                The core is the part of the processor that is responsible for executing a single instruction stream. It is necessary to choose one or another number of cores, based on the task that they will perform. The dual-core processor is suitable for surfing the Internet, games with minimal requirements, as well as office work. Quad-core with 4 threads — for standard tasks and games with medium requirements. Quad-core with 8 threads will handle powerful games. Six and eight-core — copes with all highly demanding games and programs. A processor with more than eight cores is suitable for specialized computers;
                Simultaneous multithreading — also recently introduced by AMD SMT. SMT — Simultaneous MultiThreading, which in translation means simultaneous multithreading, which is necessary for the simultaneous execution of different tasks. The principle of this technology is as follows: so for 1 physical core it is represented as 2 virtual or logical. And, accordingly, the place of processing of one stream is processed by 2;
                Cache memory — a small number of memory cells that act as a buffer. The buffer is needed to increase the speed of the computer. There are 3 levels of memory — L1, L2 and L3. L1 is located on the processor chip and is the smallest in size and fastest in speed. L2 is also included in the crystal, the frequency corresponds to the frequency of the processor core. L3 is the slowest but largest memory;
                Connector, also known as a socket (socket) — is necessary for connecting the processor to the motherboard and further interacting with it

                Please note that the motherboard socket is suitable for a certain type of processor. Therefore, before buying a processor, it is imperative to find out the socket of the motherboard;
                Heat dissipation and energy consumption — dependent on production technology

                Highest frequency, small processor size, good cooling system and load balancing system contribute to the best energy efficiency and heat dissipation;
                Integrated graphics processor — is a graphics core built directly into the processor. This association is used for a desktop computer, as well as for laptops in the budget segment. The integrated chip can reduce the cost of devices, reduce the power consumption of iron and create a compact hardware;
                The internal frequency multiplier coefficient is the result of multiplying the internal frequency coefficient by the reference frequency received from the motherboard;
                The process technology is the size of the transistors, the processor performance depends on them. The smaller size of the transistors makes it possible to place a large number of them on a chip.

                Which AMD processor is better to buy

                When choosing a model, an important criterion is its performance, which provides the ability to use for specific tasks. The value of the parameter allows you to determine which processors are suitable for games, complex computing programs. For people of creative professions, a necessary element of the gadget is the graphics core. If you need to overclock, you need to choose a device with an unlocked multiplier. The possibility of application for resource-intensive tasks depends on the number of cores. If there are less than 6 — 8, then the option is suitable only for simple office solutions. The following recommendations will help simplify the choice:

                • AMD’s most powerful processor — Ryzen 7 Summit Ridge;
                • Buy AMD Athlon X4 Kaveri for good graphics;
                • Best in price/quality ratio — AMD FX-8350;
                • AMD Athlon 200GE Raven Ridge is a good option for a low budget;
                • Heavy gamers should choose AMD Ryzen 5 Pinnacle Ridge.

                A good processor allows the computer to quickly solve the tasks, provides the comfort of working with the device. When studying the parameters, the purpose of the model must be taken into account. The task of the rating is to facilitate the choice, point out the pros and cons of each option.

                System baseline in BIOS (out of the box)

                If you have not changed anything yet, then by default we will have the following values:

                • Processor frequency (CPU): 4 GHz with turbo boost up to 4. 2 GHz.
                • Random access memory (RAM): 1866MHz.
                • Integrated northbridge (NB): 2200MHZ.
                • Hyper transport tire (HT): 2400MHZ
                • All power saving features are enabled in BIOS.

                All tests will be run at maximum settings, but this is not the correct method for testing the processor, but tests at minimum settings are of no interest to anyone. It was because of this that a powerful video card was taken.

                If you’re interested in overclocked FX8350 performance with more affordable graphics cards, check out the links: RX 580 with FX 8350, AMD FX 8350 with GTX 1660 Super and FX 8350 + GTX 780 TI.

                Tests will be conducted in FULL HD resolution, at maximum graphics presets.

                Let’s see what this configuration can do out of the box.

                Tested games

                We will test the combination of FX8350 with GTX 1660 Super in 7 popular games from different developers with different optimization of games for hardware:

                1. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018) by Ubisoft Quebec
                2. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2015) by CD Projekt RED
                3. Resident Evil 2 Remake (2019) by Capcom R&D Division 1
                4. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) by Nixxes Software and Crystal Dynamics
                5. Battlefield V (2018) by DICE
                6. Hitman 2 (2018) by IO Interactive
                7. Metro Exodus (2019) by 4A Games

                Graphics settings are maxed out. FULL HD resolution, 1920×1080.

                Also keep in mind that when recording Radeon Relive, about 3-5 frames are lost. In the game, the readings will be better.

                AMD FX 8350 overclocking on the bus

                Overclocking on the reference bus (be sure to review the overclocking on the multiplier before starting overclocking on the bus).

                Before we changed the frequency multipliers of the processor and RAM. Selecting voltage for them, while the frequency of the BCLK reference bus was 200 MHz, if you remember, we switched it from the AUTO position to 200. Which is generally the same.

                The reference bus frequency is 200 MHz on all boards with an AM3+ socket.

                The reference bus frequency can be changed on Gigabyte boards in the M.I.T. / Advanced Frequency Settings / BCLK CLOCK CONTROL

                • On ASUS boards — ADVANCED MODE / AI TWEAKER / CPU BUS FREQUENCY
                • On MSI boards — OC / ADJUST CPU FSB FREQUENCY

                But we set the frequencies of the north bridge and HT manually, while the board itself changed the multiplier values.

                Why is it needed. Overclocking by multipliers does not work correctly on all boards.

                The first stage is identical to multiplier overclocking, turn off all power saving functions and turn on LLC.

                Now when overclocking the FX 8350 on the bus, we need to change the frequency of the BCLK reference bus, which will affect the frequencies of all indicators dependent on it.

                For example, let’s take the default values ​​of my motherboard and see what multipliers are there and what we can get by increasing the BCLK frequency, say by 20.

                • BCLK is equal to 200 MHz
                • NB — 2200 MHz = 11
                • HT — 2400 MHz = 12
                • CPU — 4000 MHz — 20
                • RAM 1866 MHz — 9.33

                These are the default values ​​we have. How to calculate multiplier values? Divide the frequency by the value of BCLK and get the multiplier.

                • i.e. for NB 2200, divide by 200 and get a multiplier of 11.
                • HT multiplier 12
                • CPU multiplier 20
                • RAM multiplier 9. 33

                If we raise the reference bus by 20 MHz, we get the following frequency values:

                • NB — 2440 MHz
                • HT — 2640 MHz
                • Memory — 2052 MHz
                • Processor — 4400 MHz

                Next, we overclock all the system components one by one.

                Raise the bus to 220, adjust by multipliers the frequency indicators of those components that we do not want to raise yet.

                For example, we are driving the frequency of NB and HT:

                Raising the frequency of BCLK to 220, we have the frequency of NB 2440, HT — 2640, but we have also increased the frequency for the processor and RAM.

                What are we doing?

                We lower the processor multiplier to 18.5, the frequency will be equal to 4070MHz, we set the RAM frequency multiplier to 7, the frequency will be equal to 1680. Now neither the processor nor the RAM will prevent us from overclocking NB.

                It remains only to select the voltage for the north bridge. Where and how to do it, see multiplier overclocking.

                After you select the voltage for the NB, start overclocking the RAM and processor by raising the multipliers and adjusting the voltage. Multipliers on memory and processor should work on all motherboards.

                On some boards, these may be predefined XMP profiles.

                It’s not difficult once you get the gist of the process.

                What and where to change, everything is the same as when overclocking by a multiplier, only the BCLK value will not be equal to 200, but to the one you specify. And you do the recalculation on it, taking into account your multipliers. In the example above, I showed how it works.

                Overclocking the FX 8350 on the bus

                Company Information

                The company, which is considered the second largest manufacturer of central processing units, was founded in America in 1969 year. The range also includes adapters, motherboards, chipsets for them. The company’s products are able to solve the most complex issues in computing and visualization. They are developed taking into account innovative technologies that provide high computer performance for any task.

                The company’s policy is based on the principle of maintaining the quality of manufactured products. The purpose of the work is to provide the buyer with high-level products. AMD employees constantly conduct research in the field of integrated circuit design, computer architecture, software development. This allows us to produce technologies of the future that are accessible to the average consumer.

                Comparison of FX 6300 and FX 8350 processors

                FX 6300 FX 8350
                # OF CPU CORES 6 8
                # OF THREADS 6 8
                BASE CLOCK 3.5GHz 4.0GHz
                MAX BOOST CLOCK Up to 3.8GHz Up to 4.2GHz
                TOTAL L1 CACHE 288KB 384KB
                TOTAL L2 CACHE 6MB 8MB
                TOTAL L3 CACHE 8MB 8MB
                CMOS 32nm SOI 32nm SOI
                TDP 95W 125W
                MAX TEMPS 70. 50°C 61°C
                SYSTEM MEMORY SPECIFICATION 1866MHz 1866MHz
                SYSTEM MEMORY TYPE DDR3 DDR3

                Comparison table AMD FX 6300 vs FX 8350

                Both processors are based on the 32nm FinFET process technology and work with DDR3 memory with a recommended frequency of 1866MHz. They also have an L3 cache of 8mb. This is where the similarities end.

                Of the differences:

                • Number of cores
                • Number of threads
                • Base frequency
                • Maximum frequency
                • L1 cache
                • L2 cache
                • TDP
                • Maximum temperature
                • Frequency NB

                What is the central processing unit made of?

                The CPU is a thin square plate with an area of ​​a few mm2. Inside the processor, in a silicon package (often referred to as a stone), are logic circuits assembled using more than ten million transistors.

                Central processing unit consisting of:

                • From the control unit (CU), which is responsible for organizing and executing programs, and also coordinates the communication of all devices of an electronic computer during its operation;
                • Arithmetic logic unit (ALU) — necessary to perform comparison and division, multiplication and subtraction, as well as other arithmetic and logical operations on data;
                • Memory is the internal memory of the microprocessor, which consists of a register and a cache. To save intermediate results and perform calculations, intermediate fast memory is used in the form of registers. And for paging data and commands from RAM, as well as to speed it up, cache memory is used. The register and cache form the core of the processor;
                • The clock generator produces electrical impulses that time the operation of all nodes on the computer.

                Rating of AMD processors

                Each line of models has characteristic features that determine the peculiarities of using the chipset. AMD graphics processors are recommended for creative users, powerful devices from the Ryzen series are suitable for game lovers, Athlone is mainly used in office equipment. When choosing the best options, you need to take into account the characteristics that affect the quality of the element. The review is based on comparative tests of the following parameters:

                • Clock frequency;
                • Bit depth;
                • Dimension of the technological process;
                • Socket type;
                • Number of cores;
                • Cache level;
                • Energy consumption;
                • Heat dissipation;
                • Operating temperature;
                • Integrated graphics core.

                Review of AMD processors takes into account the price / quality ratio in the nominees. The company’s devices are considered the best in this category. Most experts will confirm the reliability, functionality of the models, which are divided into 3 categories in the rating. The sections provide a description, pluses and minuses of each element.

                Best SSDs

                FX 6300 vs FX 8350 die layout comparison

                The FX

                FX 6300 crystal was obtained by disabling one of the four dual-core processor modules. However, disabling two cores on a chip did not affect the size of the L3 cache, it has 8mb as a full-fledged Vishera.

                Crystal FX 6300

                However, the L2 cache, which in the Pildriver microarchitecture is individual for each pair of cores, is smaller in the FX6300 and consists of three 2-MB parts. Those. its total volume is 6mb versus 8mb for the eight-core FX8350.

                Crystal FX 6300. L2 cache

                Another difference of Vishera’s six-core modification is the reduced northbridge frequency to 2000MHz versus 2200MHz for FX8350.

                But the maximum temperature of the FX6300 is 10 degrees higher and amounts to 70.5 degrees, which gives a potentially greater overclocking maneuver.

                Top AMD Fx Processors

                The Fx generation is built using the 32nm process. The range includes inexpensive devices that are designed to solve simple tasks, improved options with 8 cores at a low price. The Fx series needs comprehensive overclocking, so to improve performance, you need to buy a good motherboard, upgrade RAM and other elements. The analysis of technical characteristics tests made it possible to single out 2 best AMD Fx Vishera processors from 6 nominees.

                AMD FX-8350

                Consists of 8 cores, clock frequency does not exceed 4 GHz. An unlocked multiplier and Turbo Core feature allows you to overclock it up to 7.4 GHz. The amount of cache memory 2 and 3 levels is 8 MB. The cooling system uses liquid nitrogen, the processor case does not heat up above 73 degrees. The Piledriver microarchitecture is inferior in performance to the Zen version, but reduces the price of the device. The advantages of the model include the ability to simultaneously open up to 20 tabs in the browser, Photoshop, a simple game and other utilities.

                Advantages

                • High reliability;
                • Low degree of heating;
                • Overclocking capability;
                • Low price;
                • Presence of 3 cache levels;
                • Good degree of heat dissipation.

                Disadvantages

                • Not intended for gaming;
                • Graphics core missing.

                AMD FX-4300

                Processor with 4 cores, 3.8 GHz. In appearance, the model does not differ from the previous nominee, but is inferior to it in terms of its main characteristics. The multiplier in it is also unlocked, so there is the possibility of increasing performance by using the Turbo Boost function. The operating temperature is 70.5 degrees, the amount of heat dissipation does not exceed 95 W.

                Advantages

                • Low price;
                • Fast work;
                • Low degree of heating;
                • Overclocking capability;
                • Level 3 cache.

                Disadvantages

                • No integrated graphics core;
                • Low memory.

                Users say that the quality of the model matches the price. It is recommended to choose a device for solving simple tasks, since the characteristics of the core and memory are not intended for gaming programs, complex computing processes.

                The best AMD Athlon processors

                The models in this series have low or no L3 cache, so they are not suitable for gaming computers. The devices are mainly used for office units. The advantages include high performance, low price, but the parameters of memory, heat dissipation, and cores are worse for Altons. Based on feedback from users and experts, 3 best AMD Athlon processors were selected from 10 nominees.

                AMD Athlon 200GE Raven Ridge (AM4, L3 4096Kb)

                Combines the processor part and powerful integrated graphics. The base frequency is 3.2 GHz. They release a model with 2 cores based on the 14 nm process technology, Zen microarchitecture. Good graphics quality is provided by the Vega 3 video core with 192 threads and a nominal frequency of 1000 MHz. The kit includes a boxed cooler with an aluminum heatsink and an axial fan. On the reverse side there are legs for the Socket AM4 connector.

                Advantages

                • 4 MB level 3 cache;
                • Low price;
                • Good memory performance;
                • DisplayPort and HDMI support;
                • Medium case heat level.

                Weaknesses

                • Dynamic overclocking not supported;
                • 8 channels.

                Users believe that the price of the device corresponds to its quality. The cooler works quietly, games up to 2016 pull easily, then it depends on the application.

                AMD Athlon X4 Kaveri

                The best entry-level processor built with innovative computing, graphics technologies for users who value high responsiveness. The architecture of the integrated graphics card allows you to take advantage of the element upgrade. It provides uninterrupted surfing on the Internet, video streaming without freezing, playing games in 720p resolution. At the same time, the model does not have a level 3 cache, so it is not suitable for games.

                Pros

                • Unlocked for overclocking;
                • Low price;
                • Supports PCI-E x16 3.0;
                • Good performance;
                • Not heated;
                • 4 cores.

                Disadvantages

                • Process 28 nm;
                • Socket FM2+.

                The AMD Athlon X4 Kaveri processor is inferior to the previous nominee in a number of characteristics. The main advantage is the possibility of overclocking to 4.5 GHz, although it is better to work at 4.2. At the same time, the device heats up to 51 — 67 degrees, which increases its reliability and durability. 86% of users recommend buying a home desktop model.

                Best CPU Coolers

                AMD Athlon X4 Richland

                Four-core device based on 32nm process technology. The core design is similar to the Trinity variant, but with an increased clock speed. In terms of performance, it is inferior to the Kaveri version. It consists of Piledriver architecture, VLIW 4 graphics core. AMD processor will provide fast system boot, wireless connection of TVs, gesture control, real-time video processing. Compared to its predecessors, the speed of cores and graphics has been increased by 5-10%, the memory controller has been improved.

                Pros

                • Heavy multitasking;
                • Low price;
                • Speed;
                • Overclocking possible;
                • Good graphics.

                Disadvantages

                • Gets hot;
                • L3 cache is missing.

                Users have no complaints about the operation of the device. Pictures in Photoshop amaze with saturation, color depth. The main disadvantage is the noise of the cooler. At the same time, under a load of 100% and stock frequencies, it heats up to a maximum of 40 degrees.

                FX 6300 (4.2GHz) vs FX 8350

                The FPS values ​​that both processors will show are far from the limit, in all games we will rest on the performance of the RX 580 8Gb video card. With a more powerful card, you can get a significant increase in the minimum and average FPS values.

                Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

                FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 23 FPS
                • AVG — 35 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 24 FPS
                • AVG — 32 FPS

                FX 6300 beat FX 8350 by 4.35% in rare events. The result is within the margin of error. In terms of average FPS, the FX 6300 outperformed an octa-core processor by 9.38%.

                The FX6300 is slightly ahead of the FX8350, but the FX 6300 is loaded more heavily during gameplay. Although the difference is minor.

                In general, Assassin’s Creed is not the best game for a bunch of AMD and Radeon.

                But for 2013 processors, this is a good indicator at maximum settings, in one of the most demanding games.

                Battlefield V

                FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Battlefield V

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 29 FPS
                • AVG — 52 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 41 FPS
                • AVG — 63 FPS

                In rare events 1%Low FX 8350 outperformed FX 6300 by 41.38%. In terms of average FPS, the FX 8350 beat the FX 6300 by 21.16%.

                In Battlefield V, the octa-core processor performs better on both medium and rare events.

                This FX 6300 game lacks additional RAM. Perhaps with her presence, he would close the gap.

                In this game, the processors are loaded almost under 100%, and it is in such cases that the FX 8350 will always show the best performance.

                Shadow of the Tomb Raider

                FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Shadow of the Tomb Raider

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 32 FPS
                • AVG — 58 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 57 FPS
                • AVG — 69 FPS

                According to the minimum events, the FX 8350 almost doubled the FX 6300, which amounted to 78.15%. about the average FPS, the gap was an impressive 18.97%.

                Shadow of the Tomb Raider has 100% CPU utilization. And FX 8350 shows the best performance.

                This FX 6300 game clearly lacks RAM. With more of it, perhaps the gap would be smaller.

                The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 33 FPS
                • AVG — 58 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 32 FPS
                • AVG — 52 FPS

                In Witcher 3, processors are almost parity in terms of rare events. The FX 6300 outperforms the older model by 3.13%. The result is within the margin of error. And in terms of average FPS, it is no longer an impressive 11.54%.

                The Witcher 3 completely repeats the situation in Assassin’s Creed. The FX6300 is loaded more than the FX 8350 and produces better results. Most likely it’s the optimization of these games.

                An overclocked FX8350 will not change this picture.

                Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 34 FPS
                • AVG — 60 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 42 FPS
                • AVG — 61 FPS

                In this game, the gap is very small. The FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 23.53% in rare events, while processors have parity in average events.

                In Jedi Fallen Order, processors are almost parity. Although, in terms of processor load, the FX 6300 was loaded more during the test period.

                Hitman 2

                Comparison of FX 6300 (4.2) vs FX 8350 (4.2) in Hitman 2

                AMD FX 6300:

                • 1%Low — 24 FPS
                • AVG — 48 FPS

                AMD FX 8350:

                • 1%Low — 35 FPS
                • AVG — 58 FPS

                In this game, the advantage of eight core processors is very serious, both in rare events and in average FPS. The FX 8350 outperformed the FX 6300 by 45.84% in rare events and 20.84% ​​in average events.

                Hitman has excellent optimization for multithreading, and here both processors are loaded almost at 100%. But the FX 8350 performs better in both medium and rare events.

                In this game, perhaps 8Gb of memory is not enough for the FX 6300. And the gap could be reduced a little.

                Fixed Rate Test Conclusions

                The test results show that the main advantage of the eight-core processor is the higher 1% Low readings. It is this indicator that directly affects the smoothness of the game. Average FPS is close to FX 6300.

                Keep in mind that the FX 6300 is overclocked, and the FX 8350 is fixed at its rated frequencies, the memory subsystem on all processors has identical overclocking values.

                It is possible that with a large amount of RAM, exactly 1% Low would be higher for a six-core processor, but unfortunately it has what we have.

                Let’s see what the FX 8350 can show if we add 500 MHz to the cores.

                Correct overclocking result AMD FX 8350

                Cinebench R20

                Cinebench R20 result

                Results:

                • Single core (sigle core): 230 points
                • In a lot of stream: 1480 points

                In overclocking, the processor scored 230 points in a single thread, 1480 in a multi-thread. Which is an impressive result.

                In single-threaded calculations, the processor improved by 7.47%, in multi-threaded by 11.95%.

                Adobe Premiere Pro

                Result in Adobe Premiere Pro

                Media file export in Adobe Premiere Pro 2020 completed in 2 minutes 39seconds. That is 7.11% higher than the base frequency of the processor and memory subsystem.

                Aida 64 Cash & Memory Benchmark

                Result in AIDA 64

                Write speed to RAM is 28913 MB/s, read speed is 18163 MB/s.

                This is already at a memory frequency of 2133 MHz, and an NB frequency of 2600MHz. The results are very good. Write speed increased by 28.20%, read speed by 17.58%.

                The Witcher: Wild Hunt

                Overclocking result of FX8350 in The Witcher: Wild Hunt

                Maximum graphics settings:

                • 1% low — 56 fps
                • AVG — 78 fps.

                An excellent result of increasing the minimum FPS by 24%.

                Shadow Of The Tomb Rider

                FX8350 overclocking result in Shadow Of The Tomb Rider

                Maximum graphics settings:

                • 1% low — 56 fps
                • AVG — 77 fps

                An impressive increase. The only thing that practically did not react to overclocking was 1% Low at maximum settings. But the average FPS has grown by 10%. Again, these are the maximum settings, and here we run into the capabilities of the GTX 1060 3Gb video card.

                Battlefield V

                FX8350 overclocked result in Battlefield V

                Max graphics settings:

                • 1% low — 41 fps
                • AVG — 74 fps

                Percentage-wise, Battlefield V showed a nice performance boost, but only on the lowest settings. At the maximum graphics settings, we run into the capabilities of our video card.

                Conclusions

                In general, the result is predictable. Two additional cores and an increased L1 and L2 cache in modern games give a significant boost both in the minimum and in the average events.

                With the overclocked memory subsystem, the eight-core FX, in my opinion, shows excellent results at ultra settings in modern and demanding games, especially in those that are better optimized for a lot of thread. Without emphasis on the video card, we would have seen other numbers.

                Games are getting better and better at using a lot of thread, and 8 cores are already showing much better results than 6 cores.

                2022 © All rights reserved