|
| 5.7 Out of 10 |  | by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012) by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012) |
| | ||
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of the AMD FX 6300 among desktop CPUs (over 75W)
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Fire Strike | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 5.7 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
Benchmarks Real world tests of the AMD FX 6300
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Reviews Word on the street for the AMD FX 6300
 |
| |
|---|---|---|
What People Are Saying Give it to me straight
Socket Type
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)The FX-6200 was originally set to run at 3.8GHz while this Piledriver version is set at just 3.5GHz.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)The one that we've been interested in getting our techy mitts on is this six-core FX-6300.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)In a bit of a switch around from the FX-8350, where it turned up with a 4GHz clockspeed compared to the FX-8150's 3.6GHz, this six-core CPU is set up slower than its Bulldozer ancestors.
Socket
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)That's not the only difference between this and the previous chip as, despite having the same general make-up and 14MB cache size, the FX-6300 has got a lower TDP than the Bulldozer.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)Still, as a budget alternative, the FX-6300 is a very capable CPU offering decent multi-threaded performance, even at stock speed for use in productivity-related tasks and improved gaming performance too.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)Part of that is down to the fact that it's a very cool-running chip - at stock speeds it's running at 28°C under load.
Performance
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)The multi-threaded performance easily eclipses a stock Core i5, and almost manages to do the same in single-threaded performance too.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)In fact if anything the overclocking performance has been enhanced.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)Steamroller should squeeze more into each Bulldozer module to allow each core to function much more like a traditional CPU core, and should seriously beef up the single-threaded performance of the next generation processors.
Power
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)With the clockspeeds taking a cut compared to the previous processor, and a lower overall TDP to boot, you might be forgiven for thinking the overclocking prowess of this Piledriver CPU may have been compromised.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)Pleasingly that drop in both TDP and clockspeed doesn't mean this is a slower chip in real-world terms.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)With that sort of raw processing power from a cheaper chip you could then drop the money you're saving going for an AMD platform and plough that cash into a superior graphics card.
Benchmark
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)We've even managed to push the FX-6300 over 5GHz and had it stably posting benchmark scores.
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)In the other straight CPU performance tests in Cinebench it shows a very slight advantage, though the improvements in single-threaded performance aren't as pronounced as with the FX-8350.
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary
| Clock speed | 3.5 GHz |
|---|---|
| Turbo clock speed | 4.1 GHz |
| Cores | Hexa core |
| Socket type | AM3+ |
| Is unlocked | Yes |
features
| Has a NX bit | Yes |
|---|---|
| Has virtualization support | Yes |
| Instruction set extensions |
|
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes |
integrated graphics
| GPU | None |
|---|
memory controller
| Memory controller | Built-in |
|---|---|
| Memory type | DDR3-1866 |
| Channels | Dual Channel |
| Supports ECC | Yes |
| Maximum bandwidth | 29,866.66 MB/s |
details
| Architecture | x86-64 |
|---|---|
| Threads | 6 threads |
| L2 cache | 6 MB |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core |
| L3 cache | 8 MB |
| L3 cache per core | 1.33 MB/core |
| Manufacture process | 32 nm |
| Transistor count | 1,200,000,000 |
| Max CPUs | 1 |
| Die size | 319 mm² |
| Clock multiplier | 20 |
| Voltage range | 0.8 - 1.43V |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 62.5°C |
overclocking
| Overclock popularity | 82 |
|---|---|
| Overclock review score | 0.8 |
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.76 GHz |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.82 GHz |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 7,541 |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.76 GHz |
power consumption
| TDP | 95W |
|---|---|
| Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year |
| Performance per watt | 9.84 pt/W |
| Typical power consumption | 77.19W |
bus
| Clock speed | 2,600 MHz |
|---|
Report a correction Follow us
Compare
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A10-9600P vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $394 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $1,116 | $281 | |
| 7410 vs 5200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| 7200U vs 6200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $350 | $344 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 11 comments.
