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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 4330

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 4330

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 43.88W vs 77.19W Around 45% lower typical power consumption
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 66.8 °C vs 62.5 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year vs 22.89 $/year Around 45% lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year vs 83.22 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Oct, 2012 Release date 8 months later
Front view of AMD FX 6300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6300

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 1 MB 6x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
More cores 6 vs 2 Three times as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.75 GHz vs 3.65 GHz More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.82 GHz vs 3.5 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 4330 vs FX 6300

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4330
6,730
FX 6300
7,871

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4330
3,216
FX 6300
2,053

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4330
4,360,000 MB/s
FX 6300
2,290,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4330
6,615
FX 6300
7,447

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4330
7,205
FX 6300
8,232

GeekBench

Core i3 4330
7,205
FX 6300
9,503

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 4330
5,073
FX 6300
6,444

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 4330
2,030
FX 6300
1,446

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 4330  vs
FX 6300 
Clock speed 3.5 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Hexa core
Is unlocked No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 54W 95W
Annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 14.81 pt/W 9.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 43.88W 77.19W

details

Core i3 4330  vs
FX 6300 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 6
L2 cache 1 MB 6 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 4 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1.33 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 66.8°C Unknown - 62.5°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.65 GHz 4.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz 4.82 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 3,259.8 7,541
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.65 GHz 4.75 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 4330
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 12 comments.
cpuboos é puxa saco da intel!
Haha single core performance means nothing anymore. All applications use multiple cores and everything is getting improved graphics. The 6300 is more cost effective and will run equivalent to i3. Spend the difference on either RAM or GFX card upgrade and you will no doubt have a better computer.
Overclocked I think the FX is certainly a better chip than an i3. Unless your playing Skyrim, Guildwars 2, Assassins Creed 4 and Unity and a few other games which run like junk on AMD FX CPU's. A mate of mine has recently just bought a g3258k, he overclocked it and I personally think its a better CPU for games than an FX6300.
Yes, the i3 and the FX trade blows, but the 6300 will perform better in most situations. Its capabilities are more diverse. Some games are better optimised for better per-core performance, yet most games now are being optimised for more threads (Especially in Crysis, Battlefield 4, etc.). And as I mentioned before: it's cheaper than all of the i3's.
I own an overclocked FX6300. Its not as great as everyone makes out. Particularly in certain games.
I entirely disagree. The 6300 is an amazing performer for budget gaming and its cheaper than the i3. And yes, overclocking is a plus for a 6-core cpu around $100.
Yeah but the i3's single core performance absolutely thrashes the FX chips single core performance. And it only suffers a small loss in all the other tests. If you couldn't overclock the FX I certainly would choose the i3, especially for gaming.
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_v._Intel for further details... AMD sued and won an anti-trust lawsuit against Intel in the EU, USA, Japan, and Korea, and was awarded compensation as a result of the litigation rulings in it's favor. Actually, AMD didn't directly sue in the United States. In the US, the SCOTUS saw the documents as part of the discovery process for both foreign cases, due to Intel filing a motion to block the supplying of said documents as per the subpoenas overseas, and the US attorney general filed on AMD's behalf.
Actually, if you average the scores, the 6300 gets 8,075 vs the 4330's 7.675. Either the wattage difference is very heavily weighted for overall scores, or I cry foul, as in foul play... Companies often pay sites like this to favor one product over another, or give free products in exchange for good or favorable reviews over the competition... This is why I only rely on independent reviewers, and big-time reviewers that clearly don't play these types of games (AnandTech, for example). Knowing the shady (illegal!) dealings Intel has gone through in the past to beat down AMD...
FX6300 is the obvious winner. It is soo much better. For Gaming PCs, don't use Intel unless they are over $1500! Just my tip.
Exactly!
so in other words, the 6300 wins 3/4, yet loses the battle entirely because it can't keep up with single core performance?
comments powered by Disqus