Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

For non-gaming is the AMD FX-6300 acceptable

I currently have an i5-650 and I'd like to build another rig. I've run across a good deal on an AMD FX-6300 and curious how it might stack up against the i5.

Any thoughts?

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

to be honest, i'll just say its not worth it, you're better off getting an i3 or something of a newer generation of processors 

Early 2020 Build : Intel i7 8700k // MSI Krait Z370 // Corsair LPX 8x2 16GB // Aorus 5700 XT // NZXT H500 

Early 2019 Build : Ryzen 2600X // Asus Tuff X470 // G.Skill Trident Z RGB 8x2 16GB // MSI RTX 2070 // NZXT H500 

Late 2017 Build : Intel i7 8700k // Asus Prime Z370-A // G.Skill Trident Z 8x2 16GB // EVGA GTX 1080 Ti  // NZXT S320 Elite 

Late 2015 Build : Intel i7 6700k // Asus Maximus VI Gene Z170 //  Corsair LPX 8x2 16GB // Gigabyte GTX 970 // Corsair Air 240

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

for strict non-gaming it should be just fine, but i'm not sure what the i5-650's specs are or how they stack up against eachother.

keep in mind that you would need a gpu alongside the 6300

Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down. - Adam Savage

 

PHOΞNIX Ryzen 5 1600 @ 3.75GHz | Corsair LPX 16Gb DDR4 @ 2933 | MSI B350 Tomahawk | Sapphire RX 480 Nitro+ 8Gb | Intel 535 120Gb | Western Digital WD5000AAKS x2 | Cooler Master HAF XB Evo | Corsair H80 + Corsair SP120 | Cooler Master 120mm AF | Corsair SP120 | Icy Box IB-172SK-B | OCZ CX500W | Acer GF246 24" + AOC <some model> 21.5" | Steelseries Apex 350 | Steelseries Diablo 3 | Steelseries Syberia RAW Prism | Corsair HS-1 | Akai AM-A1

D.VA coming soon™ xoxo

Sapphire Acer Aspire 1410 Celeron 743 | 3Gb DDR2-667 | 120Gb HDD | Windows 10 Home x32

Vault Tec Celeron 420 | 2Gb DDR2-667 | Storage pending | Open Media Vault

gh0st Asus K50IJ T3100 | 2Gb DDR2-667 | 40Gb HDD | Ubuntu 17.04

Diskord Apple MacBook A1181 Mid-2007 Core2Duo T7400 @2.16GHz | 4Gb DDR2-667 | 120Gb HDD | Windows 10 Pro x32

Firebird//Phoeniix FX-4320 | Gigabyte 990X-Gaming SLI | Asus GTS 450 | 16Gb DDR3-1600 | 2x Intel 535 250Gb | 4x 10Tb Western Digital Red | 600W Segotep custom refurb unit | Windows 10 Pro x64 // offisite backup and dad's PC

 

Saint Olms Apple iPhone 6 16Gb Gold

Archon Microsoft Lumia 640 LTE

Gulliver Nokia Lumia 1320

Werkfern Nokia Lumia 520

Hydromancer Acer Liquid Z220

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be cheaper to upgrade to an earlier compatible i7?

 

Yes you could do the upgrade, buy a new MB and CPU, but I feel like you could find a better deal on a non-k Intel CPU tgat would be a little faster for the same price.

 

I mean it all comes down to price. If someone is going to give you a CPU and MB for super cheap, then go for it.

 

What is the estimated upgraded cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CPU, Mobo and 750Ti was 100$

I didn't have a budget for a new build, just kicking some ideas around.

I mainly use my existing rig for LightRoom

 

And why do you say it's effectively a three-core CPU? the other three are hyperthreads?

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get a R3 1200 and be done with the FX 6300. 

Ryzen 5600 Be Quiet! PureBase500DX  CoolerMaster MasterLiquid 240mm RGB  Asus ROG Strix B450-F  1660 Super  Crucial DDR4 32GB 2x16 3800mhz  SK Hynix Gold P31 1TB NVMe  Seagate Barracuda 3TB  Mechanical Keyboard Red switches Logitech G402 mouse  EVGA Supernova 550w GA gold   32" Acer curved 1440p 144hz 32" MSI Curved 1440p165hz  Aopen 32" 1440p 144hz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

I currently have an i5-650 and I'd like to build another rig. I've run across a good deal on an AMD FX-6300 and curious how it might stack up against the i5.

Any thoughts?

how does it stack up? its slower than the i5 650 with a good OC on it.

 

Dont buy it, its not a good deal. I wouldn't take an FX chip if it was free tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

And why do you say it's effectively a three-core CPU? the other three are hyperthreads?

It's a hexa-core CPU. There is no set definition of a CPU core so if AMD calls it 6-cores then it's 6-cores.
This CPU is designed with 3 modules, two cores each. These cores share some resources between each other in modules (that is why some people call it a 3 core CPU, they assume a module is a core which isn't accurate), but they'll still physical cores so you may think of this design as hardware-based hyperthreading. It's not the best architecture but it's not as terrible as some people make it to be.

 

If you can get the CPU cheaper than other options then it's not a terrible buy, it should serve you well for light workloads and will be a good pairing to the 750Ti that you mentioned.

 

5 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

how does it stack up? its slower than the i5 650 with a good OC on it.

Not really. It has 5-7% slower singlethreaded performance, but 65-85% faster multithreaded one (depending on clock speeds) so it's a faster CPU. What's more, it's on a newer platform with more modern features so there's not much competition here.

6 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

Dont buy it, its not a good deal. I wouldn't take an FX chip if it was free tbh.

Your loss ;) They're not nearly as bad as you think

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB GDDR6 Motherboard: MSI PRESTIGE X570 CREATION
AIO: Corsair H150i Pro RAM: Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB 3800MHz DDR4 Case: Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic PSU: Corsair RM850x White

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Not really. It has 5-7% slower singlethreaded performance, but 65-85% faster multithreaded one (depending on clock speeds) so it's a faster CPU. What's more, it's on a newer platform with more modern features so there's not much competition here.

Your loss ;) They're not nearly as bad as you think

For a CPU that was released 3 years later than the i5, looks pretty crap to me:

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/144?vs=699

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FX-6300 is a nice CPU but you could also look for a cheap i7 for your board? I saw a i7 875k not too long ago going for 100 euro's used.

I think if you get a 4 core 8 thread i7 you should be good for quite some time, gives you the time to safe up for a new platform :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

For a CPU that was released 3 years later than the i5, looks pretty crap to me:

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/144?vs=699

It's not a particularly good CPU but it can handle GPUs up to an R9 380/380X level and has some multithreaded potential in it, so if you get it at a good price then it represents decent value.

Here's a more accurate benchmark comparing the two CPUs on the same workload: http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-650-vs-AMD-FX-6300/m340vs1555

The i5 is a 2C/4T old CPU and it's just slower than the FX-6300 in most tasks, especially once you overclock it...

I'd most likely choose something else but it all depends on local pricing and OP's budget.

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB GDDR6 Motherboard: MSI PRESTIGE X570 CREATION
AIO: Corsair H150i Pro RAM: Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB 3800MHz DDR4 Case: Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic PSU: Corsair RM850x White

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

The CPU, Mobo and 750Ti was 100$

I didn't have a budget for a new build, just kicking some ideas around.

I mainly use my existing rig for LightRoom

 

And why do you say it's effectively a three-core CPU? the other three are hyperthreads?

because 2 cores shares a floating point unit whereas normally each core has their own one, theoretically halving the performance of each core making it three cores, although windows sees 6, i say theoretically as for the most part its more than half the performance lost because of shared FPU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

RIP I thought it would atleast be a quad core, I had a 760 back in the day.

But upgrading that i5 to something like an i7-870 and overclocking it would be a good idea IMO, 4C/8T and is around the FX-8300 in terms of performance once both are OC'd ^_^

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800X GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB GDDR6 Motherboard: MSI PRESTIGE X570 CREATION
AIO: Corsair H150i Pro RAM: Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB 3800MHz DDR4 Case: Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic PSU: Corsair RM850x White

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't overclock my gear, and it's not a homemade system currently. It's an Asus cg5275 computer, which, if the internet is to be believed, is a ASUS P7H55-M, which will support up to an i7-880 CPU.

My current rig has a GTX 660 and 8 GB DDR3 with a 120GB SSD for the OS and applications. A secondary 1 TB for data

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

I don't overclock my gear, and it's not a homemade system currently. It's an Asus cg5275 computer, which, if the internet is to be believed, is a ASUS P7H55-M, which will support up to an i7-880 CPU.

My current rig has a GTX 660 and 8 GB DDR3 with a 120GB SSD for the OS and applications. A secondary 1 TB for data

you can get a xeon x3440 and overclock for a nice performance boost, they only cost $16.45 on ebay.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-X3440-SLBLF-2-53GHz-Quad-Core-LGA-1156-CPU-Processor-/122752050730?hash=item1c9497a62a:g:crsAAOSwekhZ37xx

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Heatsink: Gelid Phantom Black GPU: Palit RTX 3060 Ti Dual RAM: Corsair DDR4 2x8GB 3000Mhz mobo: Asus X570-P case: Fractal Design Define C PSU: Superflower Leadex Gold 650W

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

And why do you say it's effectively a three-core CPU? the other three are hyperthreads?

Fake news.

 

1 hour ago, ImNotThere said:

because 2 cores shares a floating point unit whereas normally each core has their own one, theoretically halving the performance of each core making it three cores,

No, not in theory nor in practice a shared FPU implies half performance - there would be no point in having any of the other components inside the module if it did.

 

1 hour ago, ImNotThere said:

although windows sees 6, i say theoretically as for the most part its more than half the performance lost because of shared FPU

"More than half the performance lost" would mean that each module performs worse than a single core. Unless you mean more than half of the performance of the second core... that would not be obvious nonsense; however, it would still be not true. It's as easy as getting any FX chip and comparing its multithreaded performance with one core enabled per module vs. two cores enabled. It won't be twice the performance (multithreaded scaling seldom is 1/n, even using full cores, but still, it would be farther form 1/n than with full cores), but it will be way more than the same.

 

 

And even if you don't have an FX or any other module-based CPU, you can still do a quick check with something like Cinebench, by comparing the MP ratios of any FX CPU with those of traditional cores wihtout HT/SMT, and those of traditional cores with HT/SMT. That alone will tell you how far CMT is from being "sort of SMT".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

Fake news.

 

No, not in theory nor in practice a shared FPU implies half performance - there would be no point in having any of the other components inside the module if it did.

 

"More than half the performance lost" would mean that each module performs worse than a single core. Unless you mean more than half of the performance of the second core... that would not be obvious nonsense; however, it would still be not true. It's as easy as getting any FX chip and comparing its multithreaded performance with one core enabled per module vs. two cores enabled. It won't be twice the performance (multithreaded scaling seldom is 1/n, even using full cores, but still, it would be farther form 1/n than with full cores), but it will be way more than the same.

 

 

And even if you don't have an FX or any other module-based CPU, you can still do a quick check with something like Cinebench, by comparing the MP ratios of any FX CPU with those of traditional cores wihtout HT/SMT, and those of traditional cores with HT/SMT. That alone will tell you how far CMT is from being "sort of SMT".

I was more refering to the use of a single FPU per core module, this would hinder the performance of a core, regardless as the FPU is being shared by two individual cores, as stated above, there is no concrete definition of a core so if amd really want to call a 4350 a quad core they can, same with 6300 hex and 8350 octa.

tbh im not sure what i meant by more than halfthe performance lost, i used to own an 8350 so i was probably referring toone benchmark in particular being around half andthen assumed the 6300 with "2" less cores would be less than half performance of the intel chip i moved to, could be wrong, i had only been awake for a short period at the time so was probably just flaming FX.

i am aware of diminishing returnsfrom multiple threads and aware that the scalability is not 100% between half a module and a full module. Also excuse my lack of knowledge but what does CMT stand for? im familiar with SMT and HT but havent come across that acronym before? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ImNotThere said:

tbh im not sure what i meant by more than halfthe performance lost, i used to own an 8350 so i was probably referring toone benchmark in particular being around half andthen assumed the 6300 with "2" less cores would be less than half performance of the intel chip i moved to, could be wrong, i had only been awake for a short period at the time so was probably just flaming FX.

The thing when you compare with Intel is that you have many other factors at play, notably the large IPC difference, which translate to large performance differences when just one core is used (that is, independently of how AMD arranged their multi-core setup, they would still lag behind in performance). That's why, for the purpose of evaluating a particular implementation of multithreading for a given architecture I recommend looking at relative scaling, rather than absolute performance.

1 hour ago, ImNotThere said:

i am aware of diminishing returnsfrom multiple threads and aware that the scalability is not 100% between half a module and a full module. Also excuse my lack of knowledge but what does CMT stand for? im familiar with SMT and HT but havent come across that acronym before? 

CMT is "Clustered Multi-Threading", the generic name for the approach of building multi-core CPUs around "modules" as AMD did with Bulldozer and successors (just as SMT or "Simultaneous Multi-Threading" is the generic name for running multiple threads in a single core, which intel trademarked as HT in their particular implementation - I think AMD doesn't have a trade mark for theirs, so we just call it SMT :P).

 

I think a good analogy for understanding SMT and CMT CPUs is:

- "Normal" single core CPU: a kitchen, with one oven, one stove, and one cook accepting one order at a time

- SMT single core CPU: a kitchen, with one oven, one stove, and one cook accepting two orders at a time, working in the second whenever he has idle time and resources (for example, first order is in the oven, and the second requires the stove).

- CMT "single module"/"dual core" CPU: a kitchen, with one oven, two stoves, and two cooks accepting one order each. They can sometimes do twice as much, but if both need the oven they'll have to wait after the each other.

- "Normal" dual core CPU: a kitchen, with two ovens, two stoves, and two cooks accepting one order each. They can pretty much ignore each other and get twice as much done as a single cook.

 

So I guess i9s or Threadrippers are Hell's restaurant :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×