FX-6300 love
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Is the FX-6300 the best budget CPU?
no unless all you have available is amd.
>>52233665
The oc is nice though as long as your not retarded and use a after market cooler
>>52233623
as a 6300 user, i need to tell you bullshit
the skylake i3 now rapes the 6300 in everything, even more with ddr4.
The only amd cpu worth right now its the fx 8320E, fite me.
>>52234118
it depends on how much you will benefit from having more cores. benchmarks you look at are on a per application basis, rather than what a typical workflow looks like, which includes heavy multitasking. two cores is atrocious for heavy multitasking but the i3 may still pull ahead, once a heavy base clock overclock is applied, which is unique to the z170 boards
>>52233623
pretty sure celeron is the cpu line for poor people.
>>52233623
I'd argue the Athlon X4 860k, since it's got 20% higher IPC at stock speeds than the 6300, and can usually overclock like a motherfucker (I can get 4.2 GHz on stock cooling without even touching the voltage).
>>52234166
>typical workflow looks like, which includes heavy multitasking
>moar coars!!!1
"Typical workloads" i.e. browsing the web while listening to music are very lightly threaded.
>>52234118
I also own mine with a GTX 960 for some occasional gaming and its never failed me yet as long as the game is optimised for multi core use
>>52233623
Do you just do gaymen, or also something else, particularly something as video or photo editing?
For games itself, a Haswell or Skymeme i3 is gonna do a better job.
Otherwise, a 6300 becomes some considerable option. Don't forget however, that AM3+ is dead and Skylake can also do BCLK overclocks to a greater extend.
>>52234301
just no, the 860k lacks l3 with means its ipc is 10% less and it clocks less because its made on a shittier process
>>52234362
Mostly gaymen but since I have other dumbshit running in the background would that help the performance at all?
>>52234301
>Kaveri
>20% IPC over Piledriver
Even AMD only states 9-18%, the 860k also overclocks worse, due to a different process in order to benefit the iGPU. (SHP vs SOI GB)
Try increasing the voltage and push it beyond 4.5. You might not even reach that.
>>52234362
>extend
Oops, I obviously meant extent.
>>52234424
It might, but that heavily depends on what you're running. Some background shit like Steam doesn't really matter.
>>52234305
brah you don't need a PC made in the last five years to do that.
you're a casual, get out.
Get an i3 or even better, save up for an i5.
X4 860K > FX-6300
>>52234776
>recommending backdoored CPUs
Hi, NSA!
>>52233623
>>52234362
Just for reference, this is how far a Skylake BCLK can do theoretically:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9848/bclk-overclocking-intels-non-k-skylake-processors-coming-soon
Obviously, they might just fuck you with a microcode update later on, but even at stock it's a considerable option anyway.
>>52234820
Post (non-selected) benchmarks or get the fuck out. FM2+ is also dead.
>>52234821
>>>/pol/
The best budget CPU is the Intel Xeon 5130.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html
Don't listen to the people that are bashing AMD. They make great processors. Why buy a quad core Intel for roughly $300 when you could buy a octacore AMD Vishera for $210. I've built three computers for my house in the last three years. My gaining pc(8 core), my home entertainment system (two terabyte hard drives one being a solid state Samsung and the other a hybrid) has all my movies, music and other junk which is running an AMD 6 core and my wife's ever day machine since she refuses to touch the other two. And it has a quad core AMD. I have never had any issues with any of them. My gaming rig used to have a 4.2 Intel quad, a few months back I out in the 4.7 octo from AMD and it out performs the Intel 100%. Long story short, AMD all the way!
>>52234942
I don't even know nowadays
>>52234821
>>52234821
your choice in OS will dictate this much more than choice in cpu
>>52235003
>I've built three computers for my house in the last three years
>Computers with AMD hardware break every year
And another reason to get an Nvidia CPU instead.
I have a spare micro ATX AM3+ motherboard laying around. What CPU should I put in it for an HTPC+emulator box? I'd like to be able to emulate PSX and Saturn.
>>52235147
i7-6700K
>>52235147
Buy a AM1 motherboard and an AMD 5350 and run it without a dedicated GPU. It's fast enough for your purposes and has a much lower power consumption.
You will save at least $100 per year.
>>52235147
>PSX
>Saturn
Pretty much every halfway modern cpu can do that nowadays. (I'm not 100% sure on Saturn though.)
Just get a 4300 or 6300 and undervolt it.
FX 8320 masterrace
>>52235147
>I'd like to be able to emulate PSX
My shitty old tablet from 2009 with a 1 GHz single core could emulate PSX games.
>>52235111
>Nvidia CPU
>>52233623
I have a fx6350.
I don't have any complaint so far: it's a cheap cpu that does its job.
It runs pretty hot tho and I'm not 100% that a skylake i3 6100 isn't going to beat the memefx in every application.
Said so both cpus are poor men cpus so who cares....
>>52236188
oh and I don't know about other countries but the price of my CPU in Italy went up by about 25€ since I bought it one year ago... I have no idea why, but if anything that's another reason NOT to buy it.
An aging technology that raises its price over time? Fuck it.
>>52233623
it isn't even a fair comparison with haslel/skyrape processors considering how old it is. needless to say, nowadays i3 will grind any fx processor in single, and anything that uses less than 5 threads.
still, its not a bad processor, it'll do pretty much anything sufficiently, for slightly cheaper but not enough considering it doesn't even pack igp, runs hot as the devil, drains power, and has poor single coar performance. it simply won't do in this era.
>>52233623
It's almost too great. My consumerism is making me want to upgrade my build, but sadly the FX-6300 is totally adequate for everything I do.
>>52233881
.. but you could just get an older i5 for the money..
>>52236836
Older i5s still run $150 though.
Don't forget that 95W means you have to pay about $100 for every year the CPU runs.
>>52233623
The only thing I didn't like about the 6300 is the stock cooler, which sounds like a plane engine when the CPU goes over 55C, but it never went above 70-72C when I used stock. Aside from that it's all good.
Ever at 4.1GHz mine never went past 45w it seems.
i3 6100 vastly outperforms it in everything but a few specific synthetics.
AMD just isn't worth buying in 2016. Hopefully the Zen platform makes them viable again.
