CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 8350 vs 6300

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

FX 8350
8.1
FX 6300
7.2
Cinebench R11.5, Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

FX 8350
8.1
FX 6300
7.9
Cinebench R11.5 (1-core), Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and 1 more

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?

FX 8350
9.9
FX 6300
8.9
Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

FX 8350
7.4
FX 6300
8.0
Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

FX 8350
8.2
FX 6300
7.6

Winner
AMD FX 8350 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 8350  based on its overclocking.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

AMD FX 8350

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of AMD FX 8350

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD FX 8350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8350

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.5 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
More l2 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 6 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Slightly higher turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz vs 4.1 GHz Almost the same
More threads 8 vs 6 2 more threads
Better PassMark score 9,134 vs 6,444 More than 40% better PassMark score
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 12,198 vs 8,279 More than 45% better geekbench (64-bit) score
Better PassMark (Overclocked) score 10,147 vs 7,541 Around 35% better PassMark (Overclocked) score
Better cinebench r10 32Bit score 22,674 vs 16,213 Around 40% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
Slightly better 3DMark11 physics score 6,880 vs 6,080 Around 15% better 3DMark11 physics score
Front view of AMD FX 6300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6300

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 159.66W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per dollar 6.66 pt/$ vs 5.21 pt/$ Around 30% better performance per dollar
Much lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year vs 56.1 $/year 2.5x lower annual home energy cost
More l3 cache per core 1.33 MB/core vs 1 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year vs 159.62 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 7.71 pt/W vs 5.14 pt/W Around 50% better performance per watt

Benchmarks Real world tests of FX 8350 vs 6300

GeekBench (32-bit)

FX 8350
11,004
FX 6300
7,507

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

FX 8350
6,880
FX 6300
6,080
FX 8350 FX 6300 @ community.futuremark.com
The FX-8350 also gave us some significant gains in 3DMark 11.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)

Cinebench R11.5

FX 8350
6.94
FX 6300
4.92
In Cinebench the AMD chip is only a little over 5 per cent slower, and in X264 there's less than a single per cent difference between them.
FX 8350 | by Tech Radar (Nov, 2012)

Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)

FX 8350
1.11
FX 6300
1.07
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.
FX 6300 | by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)

Passmark

FX 8350
9,134
FX 6300
6,444
Looking at the physics score we can see a difference of just under 900 points with the AMD FX-8350 taking the lead with 7325 3DMarks.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)

Passmark (Single Core)

FX 8350
1,525
FX 6300
1,446
Curious about real world scenarios, we decided to drop Furmark and ran 3DMark 11 on the performance preset and took the maximum power consumption during the first GPU test.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)

Reviews Word on the street

FX 8350  vs 6300 

8.0
8.0
Value is core to this arrangement, and being able to put together a decent AMD CPU/mobo combo for less than a Core i5 setup means that you get a good chunk of cash to spend on your graphics card.
FX 8350

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

FX 8350  vs
6300 
Clock speed 4 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz 4.1 GHz
Cores Octa core Hexa core
Socket type
AM3+
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
XOP
SSE3
FMA3
SSE2
FMA4
F16C
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

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
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 29,866.66 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s

details

FX 8350  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 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclock popularity 709 82
Overclock review score 0.95 0.8
Overclocked clock speed 4.7 GHz 4.78 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.99 GHz 4.82 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 10,147 7,541
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.7 GHz 4.78 GHz

power consumption

TDP 125W 95W
Annual home energy cost 56.1 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 159.62 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 5.14 pt/W 7.71 pt/W
Typical power consumption 159.66W 77.19W

bus

Clock speed 2,600 MHz 2,600 MHz
AMD FX 8350
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus