AMD FX 8320 vs 6300 |
Overclockers take note! Two powerful processors from AMD are here! Both are from the FX series, but they’re essentially different: it’s a battle between an eight core versus a six core. Let’s compare the performance of the AMD FX 8320 versus the AMD FX 6300.
As for their similarities, they pack unlocked multipliers which are ideal for overclocking goodness. Moreover, they are capable of turbo boosting up to 4 GHz! Great features performance wise, but they don’t come with integrated graphics; so adjust your budget accordingly, because you’ll need to buy a discrete graphics card.
Taking a closer look at their distinctions, the 8320 is a 3.5 GHZ octa core with 8MB cache and consumes 125W TDP. In contrast is the 6300, which is similarly clocked at 3.5 GHz but only has six cores. It also comes with 8MB cache but consumes less power at 95W TDP. Considering that the 8320 has more cores, does it consequently mean that its faster overall?
Benchmarks reveal that indeed the 8320 is faster than the competition: at stock speeds, it’s more than 25% faster in PassMark, 25% better in 64-bit Geekbench, and 30% better in the Cinebench benchmarks. As for overclocking performance however, it’s quite surprising that the 6300 managed to score around 70% better results in the PassMark overclocked benchmark, which makes it as the undisputable champion when it comes to overclocking.
In conclusion, consider your needs before buying: if you’re a power user satisfied with stock settings, we recommend the AMD FX 8320. But if you’re an overclocker with an insatiable thirst for blazing speed, take a ride on the fast lane and overclock the AMD FX 6300.
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 8320 Black Edition vs the 6300 Black Edition. | |||||||
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 6300 Black Edition vs the 8320 Black Edition. | |||||||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of FX 8320 vs 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)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | FX 8320 | vs | 6300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.5 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 4 GHz | 4.1 GHz | |
| Cores | Octa core | Hexa core | |
| Socket type | |||
| AM3+ | |||
| Is unlocked | Yes | Yes | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AVX 1.1 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| F16C | |||
| MMX | |||
| XOP | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| ABM | |||
| BMI1 | |||
| CLMUL | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| FMA3 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| CVT16 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| TBM | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | None | |
| Label | N/A | N/A | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | N/A | |
| 3DMark06 | N/A | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1866 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 29,866.66 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
details | FX 8320 | vs | 6300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 8 | 6 | |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 6 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 1.33 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 32 nm | 32 nm | |
| Transistor count | 1,200,000,000 | 1,200,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Die size | 319 mm² | 319 mm² | |
| Clock multiplier | 20 | 20 | |
| Voltage range | 0.8 - 1.43V | 0.8 - 1.43V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 61.1°C | Unknown - 62.5°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 63 | 82 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.56 GHz | 4.75 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.75 GHz | 4.82 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 9,317 | 7,541 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.56 GHz | 4.75 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 125W | 95W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 30.11 $/year | 22.89 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 109.5 $/year | 83.22 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 7.79 pt/W | 9.84 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 101.56W | 77.19W | |
bus | |||
| Clock speed | 2,600 MHz | 2,600 MHz | |
 AMD FX 8320  Report a correction |  AMD FX 6300 Report a correction |
Desktops
Looking for a desktop?
- 3 desktops with the AMD FX 8320, starting from $899
- 6 desktops with the AMD FX 6300, starting from $530
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $100 | $125 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs Intel Core i3 6100 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $100 | $128 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs 8350 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $100 | $184 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs Intel Core i5 3570K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $100 | $170 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs 8300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $100 | $180 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $100 | $190 | |
| AMD FX 6300 vs Intel Core i5 4460 | ||
 | VS | |
| $140 | $128 | |
| AMD FX 8320 vs 8350 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| Intel Celeron 847 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540 | ||
