Is it really bad as they say it is

[JoshPC]

Is the AMD Fx-6300 really as bad as people say it is

[The_Stig]

Depends on what its being used for. For that price for gaming, an i3 is usually better

[LokiFire]

Compared ti i5's and i7's yeah sure, but vs an i3 it's sort of competitive due to price, but that's it.

 

Better than a Pentium 3 that most seem to like around here.

[suchamoneypit]

Its good if your on a tight budget, its certainly not going to impress anyone though.

[dalekphalm]

Is the AMD Fx-6300 really as bad as people say it is

Depends on what you are comparing it to. It's still a decent entry-level gaming CPU. You can still game at 1080p on low-medium settings and expect solid frames - assuming you have a good enough GPU to match it with.

 

It's not very strong though, and in many cases (though not all), it gets beat by an Intel i3 CPU - for gaming, an i3 w/ HT would probably be a better choice, if you were deciding which to buy.

[DarkBlade2117]

i3 For purely gaming

FX-6300 if you plan to edit, render, possibly livestream ect.

[MilkJugg24]

It just bottlenecks all the good available cards and limits you to playing medium-low settings on AAA titles. So yea it's kinda bad if you want to play any game, but if you're easily satisfied, the price makes everything else irrelevant.

[QueenDemetria]

Is the AMD Fx-6300 really as bad as people say it is

Depends on what they are saying about it, but in general I hear that FX chips are just "terrible", which they are not. Yes Intel is better for the tasks they are referring to, but a chip that delivers an acceptable amount of performance and isn't overpriced is still not "terrible", just not as good when compared to X(this would be like saying a Mustang is a terrible car since a Camaro is faster, just no).

 

I actually use FX chips unlike most that like to assume the performance of them, and they hold up well in games(not as good as either of my i7's, but like I said, acceptable performance).

 

 

Edit: Like I said, assumptions lol. low-med settings, sigh....

[JoshPC]

Depends on what you are comparing it to. It's still a decent entry-level gaming CPU. You can still game at 1080p on low-medium settings and expect solid frames - assuming you have a good enough GPU to match it with.

 

It's not very strong though, and in many cases (though not all), it gets beat by an Intel i3 CPU - for gaming, an i3 w/ HT would probably be a better choice, if you were deciding which to buy.

Would I be good with buying the i3-4160 and a Z97 motherboard so that when I have the chance I can get the i5-4690k and save money not buying another motherboard to get overclocking features?

[XTankSlayerX]

As somone who was able to pin a FX 4300 against a i3 3220...

 

The i3 made for a smoother experience for Battlefield 4, on a baseline reading with 0 players on a server. There's some micro stutter on 64P servers though

 

The FX 4300 had lower frames but they were more consistent... (Less lag spikes and the like) 

 

Soooo... Yeah, i3 wins in gaming, FX wins for productivity stuff...

 

IMO i3 wins

[JoshPC]

Here are my options

Pentium G3258 - I5-4690K (I think best option but can it still play GTA V paired with a GTX 960?)

I3-4160 - I5-4690K (Ive heard tho it's not much of a boost in performance)

Or just an FX-6300 no upgrade

Or just an i3-4160

[FruitBasketSilex]

Better than a Pentium 3 that most seem to like around here.

What?

[dalekphalm]

Would I be good with buying the i3-4160 and a Z97 motherboard so that when I have the chance I can get the i5-4690k and save money not buying another motherboard to get overclocking features?

The i3 + Z97 would definitely provide a better upgrade path, but the question is this: Do you need to buy right away, or can you save now and buy later? Since saving up to get the i5 initially will definitely be better value in the long run.

 

But you can always sell the i3 you buy used (Even here on LTT via the Classifieds), to help offset the upgrade to an i5 (or i7) later.

[Pandora]

What?

i think he ment a pentium g3258 or whatever

[JoshPC]

The i3 + Z97 would definitely provide a better upgrade path, but the question is this: Do you need to buy right away, or can you save now and buy later? Since saving up to get the i5 initially will definitely be better value in the long run.

 

But you can always sell the i3 you buy used (Even here on LTT via the Classifieds), to help offset the upgrade to an i5 (or i7) later.

Yeah considering the price difference between i3 and i5 is about $100 here in Australia, I could wait an extra few weeks to get $100 and then be better in the long run

[rmac52]

It was a decent chip when it came out.  

Now its not particularly good.  In heavily multi-threaded workloads its better than an i3.  But an i3 from ivy-bridge and on has better single threaded performance. 

[FAQBytes]

OOOOOVEERRR CLOOOOOCCKKKIIIING FTW!

 

Nah, it's a pretty garbage chip on the whole, but a decent little thing when looking at the price bracket.

[flipped_bit]

If you're buying a CPU today Intel is your best bet.  And I say that as someone whose last two processors - including my current one - are AMDs. 

 

Even an i3 will outperform an FX-6300 in most titles, plus you get PCI-Express 3.0, M.2 support, etc. with the newer Intel platform.  Not to mention an upgrade path to a more powerful i5 or i7 down the road if you wish.