delete please.

[SilentSkillz]

I was just wondering if it would be better to have a 6 core or 4 core for gaming (mostly gaming) build?

Would it be better for the fps?

and any other differences?

[Katsu-K1L]

FX 6300 is better and would perform slightly better in games.

[tek inpektor]

In CPU intensive games, yes. If you have the money I'd go with the 6300 because it's only $20ish more.

[flibberdipper]

The 4300 honestly sucks ass. Get the 6300.

[Faa]

Both will perform the same in almost any game, the 6300 is only better in a few games like Crysis 3/BF4/WD thats all about it

[patrickjp93]

Both will perform the same in almost any game, the 6300 is only better in a few games like Crysis 3/BF4/WD thats all about it

That's only true right now. The winds of change are blowing and more multi-core support is appearing in FPS games. It was already there for most modern RTS games.

[SilentSkillz]

Thanks to you all
Great advice i think i would go with the FX-6300 then 

[Gung Pow Chicken]

I would also suggest going with the 6300.

[harrynowl]

6300 is only a few £ more so might as well.

[Faa]

That's only true right now. The winds of change are blowing and more multi-core support is appearing in FPS games.

In fact multi-core support always been there. Consoles are nearly a year out and we've only seen two games taking advantage of more than 4 cores.

 

It was already there for most modern RTS games.

Such as? 

[patrickjp93]

In fact multi-core support always been there. Consoles are nearly a year out and we've only seen two games taking advantage of more than 4 cores.

 

 

Such as? 

Ever played Medieval 2 Total War or Age of Empires 3? Playing on higher levels of difficulty will lag the game without a quad-core CPU because making a deep neural network on a low core count takes exponentially more time.