AMD FX-6300 vs Intel Core i5-9600K
|
|
|
|
|
AMD FX-6300 vs Intel Core i5-9600K
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the AMD FX-6300 on one side and the Intel Core i5-9600K on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 6 cores, 6 threads, a maximum frequency of 3,8GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 6 cores, 6 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 4,6 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-6300 | Intel Core i5-9600K | ||||||
| Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Piledriver | Coffee Lake | ||||||
| Core name | Vishera | Coffee Lake-S | ||||||
| Family | FX-6000 | Core i5-9000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec | FD6300WMW6KHK, FD6300WMHKBOX |
BX80684I59600K, BXC80684I59600K, CM8068403874404, SRELU |
||||||
| Release date | Q4 2012 | Q4 2018 | ||||||
| Lithography | 32 nm SOI | 14 nm++ | ||||||
| Transistors | 1. 200.000.000 |
— | ||||||
| Cores | 6 | 6 | ||||||
| Threads | 6 | 6 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 3,5 GHz | 3,7 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | 3,8 GHz | 4,6 GHz | ||||||
| Cache memory | 8 MB | 9 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 32 GB | 128 GB | ||||||
| Memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR4-2666 | ||||||
| Max # of memory channels | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Max memory bandwidth | 29,9 GB/s | 41,6 GB/s | ||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
| TDP | 95 W | 95 W | ||||||
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 600W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | None | Intel UHD Graphics 630 (Coffee Lake) | ||||||
| GPU execution units | — | 23 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | — | 184 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | — | 350 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | — | 1150 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | — | 423,2 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Socket | AM3+ | LGA1151 | ||||||
| Compatible motherboard | Socket AM3+ Motherboard | Socket LGA 1151 Motherboard | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 70. 5°C |
100°C | ||||||
| CPU-Z single thread | 223 | 522 | ||||||
| CPU-Z multi thread | 1.022 | 2.968 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 95 | 196 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 412 | 1.071 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 single thread | 495 | 1.175 | ||||||
| Cinebench R23 multi-thread | 2.549 | 6.582 | ||||||
| PassMark single thread | 1.471 | 2.773 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 4. 124 |
10.817 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
2.518 | 5.820 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
8.133 | 22.766 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
67,2 GFLOPS | 405,3 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
86 pts / W | 240 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.
We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the turbo frequency of Intel Core i5-9600K is bigger, that their respective TDP are of the same order. The Intel Core i5-9600K was started more recently.
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 | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
522 2.  968 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
223 1.022 |
In single core, the difference is 134%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 190%.
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 | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
196 1.071 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
95 412 |
In single core, the difference is 106%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 160%.
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 | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
1.175 6.582 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
495 2.549 |
In single core, the difference is 137%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 158%.
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 | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
2.773 10.817 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
1.471 4.  124 |
In single core, the difference is 89%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 162%.
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 | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
5.820 22.766 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
2.518 8.133 |
In single core, the difference is 131%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 180%.
On Linux 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
6.081 22.092 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
2.676 8.944 |
In single core, the difference is 127%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 147%.
On Android 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
4.060 11.767 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
2.217 6.862 |
In single core, the difference is 83%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 71%.
On Mac OS X 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Core i5-9600K |
5.844 23.368 |
| AMD FX-6300 |
2.266 8.231 |
In single core, the difference is 158%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 184%.
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-6300 Intel equivalentIntel Core i5-9600K AMD equivalent
See also:
Intel Core i5-9600Intel Core i5-9600KFIntel Core i5-9600T
AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz review « 7Review
Some weeks ago, we looked at a collection of Intel i5 and i7 processors, so now it’s the turn of AMD’s FX-range.
AMD is known for producing cost-effective alternatives to Intel’s processors, but in recent years AMD has dropped the ball when it comes to manufacturing the latest processor technology.
We have six of the company’s higher-end FX processors to look at this week.
Which are worth considering for your AMD system?
DETAILS
• Manufacturer AMD
• Requirements: AM3+ motherboard, DDR3 RAM, 450W minimum PSU
The FX range of AMD’s processors were originally designed to be the affordable Intel i5 and i7 killers. Bred for high-end computing tasks, the range featured high clock speeds and an equally impressive number of cores.
The AMD FX-6300 falls into the middle of the range, but since its release in October 2012,the CPU has dropped in price significantly, making it one of the cheapest of the FX family.
Check Amazon
This 3.5GHz AM3+ socket CPU, with a turbo clock speed of 4.1GHz, boasts six cores, six threads, 6MB of L2 cache (1 MB per core), 8MB of L3 cache (1,33MB per core) and a TDP of 95W. It follows the Piledriver micro architecture, based on the Vishera processor core and a 32nm manufacturing process.
7Review earns Amazon affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases.
You can support the site directly via Paypal donations ☕. Thank you!
The processor is unlocked, as with all of the FX range and, on average, the overclock speed hits around the 4.7GHz range with a decent air cooler or around 4.8/9GHZ with a liquid CPU cooler. We did manage to hit an okay 4.8GHz using an Arctic Liquid Freezer 240, and we felt we could have gone a little higher, but we didn’t due to this being the only chip we had for testing.
Ideally, the FX-6300 makes a great budget gaming CPU, although in all fairness it’s not as fast a processor as Intel’s higher-end i5 series. However, you could easily put the savings into buying a higher-end graphics card. Likewise, the multicore tasks make for an excellent video and photo editing system, and for those who avoid gaming and focus instead on day-to-day computing tasks, the FX-6300 certainly won’t let you down.
The AMD FX-6300 manages to combine decent performance with a low cost
It’s the cheapest of the FX-range at present
As for benchmarks, we ran the FX-6300 at its stock speeds (3.
5/4.1 GHz), and with Cinebench R15 single-core, the FX-6300 managed a reasonable score of 95, and 458 for the multi-core test. The PassMark version 8.0 test came back with an overall score of 6,385 and a single-core score of 1411.
The scores are quite reasonable, placing the AMD FX-6300 just below the Intel i5-6400. While Intel still has the edge over AMD, it’s worth keeping in mind that the aforementioned rival to the FX-6300, the i5-6400, can be spent on some other component while you only suffer a slight drop in terms of performance. If you were to push the overclock, even up to a base of 4GHz, then you’ll obviously be looking at a faster system and better frame-rates or quicker decoding.
The AMD FX-6300 processor is an amazingly versatile and nicely priced CPU. It may not have the edge on some of the Intel models, especially the newer sixth-generation CPUs, but it can hold its own without breaking the bank.
8
Total Score
Add your review
7Review earns Amazon affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases.
You can support the site directly via Paypal donations ☕. Thank you!
Intel Core i5-6300HQ or AMD FX-6300
- >
- Processors
- >
- Comparison
- >
- Intel Core I5-6300HQ VS AMD FX-6300 9000
Core i5-6300U
Core i5-6300U
Compare
Compare
Compare
Family
- FX-6350 SIX-Core
Compare - FX-6120 Six-Core
Compare - FX-6100
Compare
9000 FX-6200 SIX-Core0022 Compare
Speed in games
Core i5-6300HQ
0
50.4 (+2%)
FX-6300
49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49LA in games and similar applications, according to our tests.
The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core have the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores. nine0050
The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.
Speed in office use
Core i5-6300HQ
53.1 (+1%)
FX-6300
52.4
Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office programs.
The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.
Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance. nine0050
Speed in heavy applications
Core i5-6300HQ
27.8 (+4%)
FX-6300
26.8
Performance in resource-intensive tasks loading up to 8 cores.
The performance of all cores and their number has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.
At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor. nine0050
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values corresponding to the processor.
Speed of numerical operations
Simple household tasks |
|
Core i5-6300HQ 47.5 (+16%) FX-6300 40.9 |
Demanding games and tasks |
|
Core i5-6300HQ 25.9 (+31%) FX-6300 19.8 |
Extreme |
|
Core i5-6300HQ 5. FX-6300 4.6 |
2 (+13%) Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.
We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS. nine0050
Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.
When choosing a processor for your work, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads. nine0050
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.
Benchmarks
Benchmarks were run on stock hardware, that is, without overclocking and with factory settings. Therefore, on overclocked systems, the points can noticeably differ upwards. Also, small performance changes may be due to the BIOS version. nine0050
Cinebench R20 Single Core
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
318 (+63%)
AMD FX-6300
Cinebench R20 Multi
Intel Core INTEL INTL )
AMD FX-6300
854
Blender 2.
81 bmw27
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
720.4
AMD FX-6300
1407.7 (+95%)
Geekbench 3 Multi Core
Intel Core i5 -6300HQ
9985 (+23%)
AMD FX-6300
8142
Cinebench R11.5
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
1.53 (+43%)
AMD FX-6300
S11. -6300HQ
5.28 (+7%)
AMD FX-6300
4.92
Features
Main
| Note that a socket is not guaranteed to be compatible. The manufacturer may not add support to the BIOS. nine0104 | BGA 1440 | AM3+ |
| Manufacturer Firm | Intel | AMD |
| Code name for the Microarchitecture family. | Skylake | Vishera |
Capacity
Cores The total number of physical cores. |
4 | 6 |
| ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees. | 4 | 6 |
| Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores in the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications. nine0104 | Missing | Missing |
Base frequencyGuaranteed frequency of all cores (P-cores in the case of the corresponding architecture) of the processor at maximum load. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one. |
2.3 GHz | |
| TDPThermal Design Power is an indicator that determines heat dissipation in standard operation. The cooler or water cooling system must be rated for a larger value. Remember that with a factory bus or manual overclocking, TDP increases significantly. | 45 W | 95 W |
Cache and RAM
| Supported type of RAM The type of RAM depends on its frequency and timings (speed), availability, price. nine0104 | DDR4-2133, LPDDR3-1866, DDR3L-1600 | DDR3 Dual-channel |
Video core
Integrated graphics core Allows you to use your computer without a discrete graphics card. The monitor is connected to the video output on the motherboard. If earlier integrated graphics made it possible to simply work at a computer, today it can replace budget video accelerators and makes it possible to play most games at low settings. nine0104
| Intel® HD Graphics 530 | N/A |
PCI
| PCI-E The PCI Express computer bus version. The bandwidth and power limit depend on the version. There is backward compatibility. | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8+2×4 | Gen 2 |
Detailed information
| ArchitectureCode name for the microarchitecture generation. | Skylake | Vishera |
Process The manufacturing process, measured in nanometers. The smaller the technical process, the more perfect the technology, the lower the heat dissipation and power consumption. For Ryzen with a chiplet layout, the CCD process is implied. |
14 nm |
Which is better
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
- On average, gaming performance is better by 2%.
- The speed of work in office applications and browsers is increased by 31%.
- In complex multi-threaded applications, faster and outperforms by 13%.
- 53% lower TDP
AMD FX-6300
- 2 more physical cores.
- 2 more threads.
- The base frequency is 1.2 GHz higher.
AMD FX-6300 vs. Intel Core i5-10400F
AMD FX-6300
AMD FX-6300 runs with 6 and 6 CPU threads It runs at 4.10 GHz base 4.10 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 95 W .CPU connects to CPU socket AM3+ This version includes 8.00 MB of L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 for RAM support, and supports 3.0 PCIe Gen . Tjunction stays below 71°C degrees C.
In particular, the Vishera (Bulldozer) architecture is advanced over 32 nm and supports AMD-V. The product was launched Q4/2012
Intel Core i5-10400F
Intel Core i5-10400F runs with 6 and 6 CPU threads It runs at 4.30 GHz base 4.00 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 65 W .The processor connects to LGA 1200 CPU socket This the version includes 12.00 MB of L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 to support DDR4-2666 RAM, and supports 3.0 PCIe Gen 16 . Tjunction is kept below 100°C degrees C. In particular, the Comet Lake S architecture is advanced beyond 14 nm and supports VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d . The product was launched Q2/2020
AMD FX-6300
Intel Core i5-10400F
nine0101 GPU (Turbo)
0 nine0101 Virtualization
Show more details
Show more details
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0050
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite.
Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0050
Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R15 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
nine0050
Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0050
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform test. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Blender 2.81 (bmw27)
Blender is a free 3D graphics software for rendering (creating) 3D bodies that can also be textured and animated in the program. The Blender test creates predefined scenes and measures the time(s) required for the entire scene.
The less time it takes, the better. We chose the bmw27 as our reference scene. nine0050
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading. nine0050
Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Single-Core)
Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D.