6300 vs 8320

[Sky Daddy]

Will there be that much difference performance in games. (will I be above 60fps either way?)

Will windows be faster/snappier?

 

I will be buying the first R9 290/x non-reference card.

I will not be video encoding either.

[Morpheus]

get the 8320 if  you're going with such a nice gpu, windows won't be snappier and performace will depend on the game

[needmorewood]

if u want windows to be faster/snappier an ssd will do great. but go for a 8320 if your going that high  of a gpu

[nsyedhasan]

I'd say would be a 8320 would be a better chip.

[WoodenMarker]

Not much of a difference other than better performance in games and applications that use the cores. 

If you want a fast snappy system, a ssd is your answer. 

[Ryan Leech]

I would try to save for the 8320, the eight cores will be useful in the future

[Sky Daddy]

Will more cores help more than a higher clock frequency?

FX-6300 @ 4.8ghz vs FX-8320 @ 4ghz

[Tmh85]

8320

[Kuzma]

Will more cores help more than a higher clock frequency?

FX-6300 @ 4.8ghz vs FX-8320 @ 4ghz

it depends on the application but in the future cores will be much prefered to frequency.

[Sky Daddy]

Thanks for the answers, I'll be getting the 8320. 

 

(Don't know how to close the thread or mark as solved)

[HerEscutcheon]

Gaming-wise, the 8320 will be better with games that use more than 4 cores. For any game using 4 or fewer, the performance should be about the same.