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

Intel Core i3 6100

Front view of Intel Core i3 6100
Front view of AMD FX 6300

AMD FX 6300

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 6100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 6100

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 41.44W vs 77.19W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Higher clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 3.5 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 2,106 vs 1,446 More than 45% better PassMark (Single core) score
Newer Jul, 2015 vs Oct, 2012 Release date over 2 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1.33 MB/core Around 15% more l3 cache per core
Front view of AMD FX 6300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6300

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 9.35 pt/$ vs 1.84 pt/$ More than 5x better performance per dollar
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 3 MB Around 2.8x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More cores 6 vs 2 Three times as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better performance per watt 9.84 pt/W vs 4.51 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.75 GHz vs 4.25 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 6 vs 4 2 more threads
Slightly better PassMark score 6,444 vs 5,478 Around 20% better PassMark score
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.82 GHz vs 4.39 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 6100 vs FX 6300

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 6100
5,478
FX 6300
6,444

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 6100
2,106
FX 6300
1,446

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Core i3 6100  vs
FX 6300 
Clock speed 3.7 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 51W 95W
Annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 4.51 pt/W 9.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 41.44W 77.19W

details

 Core i3 6100  vs
FX 6300 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 6
L3 cache 3 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1.33 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 65°C Unknown - 62.5°C

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 4.25 GHz 4.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.39 GHz 4.82 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.25 GHz 4.75 GHz

integrated graphics
GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 530 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz N/A

memory controller
Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 6100
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 21 comments.
Oussama Zemma (08:11 PM, July 7, 2017)
please i need answer ho is the best pentium g3220-pentium g3470
FunnyNERD (08:08 PM, December 30, 2016)
The AMD build for price/performance ration , Intel and Nvidia is much expensiver build, I would put in your place an intel cpu and the AMD graphics card. It is namely nich was the pure AMD builds are always better, so AMD CPU to AmD graphics card. I run this CPU in my computer with a GTX 960 and I could not complain, so that AMD CPUs with NVIDIA graphics cards is not tolerable is cheese
Nettro (02:26 AM, December 29, 2016)
Plzz what is better to Buy [Intel Core i3 6100 3,7 GHz + nVidia GeForce GTX 750 TOC 2GB DDR5] or [AMD FX-6300 3,5 GHz + AMD Radeon RX460 4GB DDR5] for gaming!!?
Ken M (10:13 AM, December 18, 2016)
Dude, we still need to support AMD cause they make Intel to lower their CPU's price!!! I love every single time that AMD releases new CPUs so i could buy some cheaper intel cpu
Travbusucussssss (10:48 PM, December 15, 2016)
The intel is also half as loud roughly in my personal anecdotal experience. It's definitely the better option. Good luck!
Guest (10:10 PM, December 15, 2016)
Huh! That's something I should look into! Thanks for the name of the board! I'm going to eventually upgrade my board and CPU, this AMD isn't gonna cut it for long.
Travbusucussssss (09:48 AM, December 15, 2016)
At least until AMD's Zen architecture's unknown performance increases, go Intel. It is more expensive, but it is more expensive because it is more powerful. In the world of technology and computers, either go big or go home. Buy the best you can because if you don't, you will almost definitely regret it. A little bit more money for a little bit more future proofing is always worth it in lieu of no future proofing and more than double the cost down the line.
Travbusucussssss (09:44 AM, December 15, 2016)
I went from an FX-6300 to an i3 6100 by swapping out the motherboard and CPU, not the RAM. I got a motherboard that supports skylake but also uses DDR3 RAM. Even though the CPUs are not supposed to work with the higher voltage of DDR3, it works perfectly for me on this official motherboard. This is the one that I used: ASUS S1151 ATX Z170-P-D3 The performance increase is insane, but only in some areas. In games I get at least ~15 fps higher than before, but in some games that are more CPU dependent I get anywhere up to 50 fps increases. I am using a GTX 970 by the way. General system performance seems roughly identical, maybe a little better but I am willing to chalk that up to placebo.
Guest (08:45 AM, December 7, 2016)
I have the FX 6300 right now, and man, is it worth upgrading to an Intel CPU? Like others have mentioned, that's a new board, cpu and ram! Hmm......
moneill6720 (09:58 AM, November 2, 2016)
I agree with you i have a Fx-6300 and i love it I dont have alot of money and its a killer for perfomance I would rather have a i7 Extreeeeeeeem ediition but there like £1500 and i dont have that
Lisa Su (10:13 AM, September 25, 2016)
AMD suck gorilla dick.
CCharles11_tech (02:12 AM, September 18, 2016)
i would get an i3... IF I HAD THE MONEY. I currently have an fx 6300 OC'd to 3.8ghz. It's not too bad, but if i were to buy an i3, i would have to get the cpu, a new mobo, and new RAM. It seems pointless to upgrade once you factor in the price. It just enrages me that I have to spend $80 just on RAM that I already have, with a 4 plastered on it. I don't see a difference at all between ddr3 and ddr4. Anyway, say what you want, but I'm sticking with the fx 6300
ailouros1982 . (07:40 AM, September 3, 2016)
Yes. (July 2015 vs October 2012) Not even as a gift... i wouldn't keep it, i would sell it sealed for 50$, i would give 60$ more and buy a cood watercooling device for my i5 6600k. :)
Libri Lector (12:15 AM, August 28, 2016)
What if the FX 6300 is on sale for $80? Is it worth buying over an i3 6100 then?
ailouros1982 . (11:35 AM, August 5, 2016)
i made that mistake of buying the FX 6300 2 years ago. I regret the fact that i spend my money on that cpu. I regret the fact that i could but i didn't give some more to buy the i5-4690k. But i will not make the same mistake of buying AMD again.
CyrixFanboy (11:31 PM, July 29, 2016)
I almost made the mistake of buying a bulldozer. Buying an AMD bulldozer/piledriver CPU in 2016 is dumb, when zen is coming out in a few months, and is much faster than any current AMD cpu. Not saying that zen will blow intel away though, but it would probably blow the current AMD CPUs away.
ailouros1982 . (10:25 PM, July 28, 2016)
i'll take the i3... AMD has several years to offer something new, something powerful at the CPU's. AMD has fool countless people with her marketing (myself included) The bulldozer architechture was slower even the Thuban. Was offering the 2-3-4core cpu's as 4-6-8core... I have the FX 6300 and it has 3 modules. For me, as i see it it's a 3core cpu with somekind of hyperthreading. Many people will say "it's a REAL six core cpu... No.. NOT FOR ME... For me is a 3core cpu somehow with the cores "broken" in 2 pieces. Broken cores doesnt improve the performance.. From the other side why a 6core cpu is compared to a 2core cpu? i know, it's the price range... Why not a 6core vs a 6core cpu comparison? Oh... i forgot... the price again.... but comparing a 2 vs a 6 core is ok, it's fair... LOL For me NEVER AGAIN AMD... I'm moving to Intel i5 6600K...
Don (01:15 PM, July 23, 2016)
A... M.. D! Hotter, faster, betterrrr!
roax206 (03:23 AM, July 23, 2016)
not really, intel always seems to have much better single core performance while amd usually has much better multi core performance, L2 cache(allowing more processing for less speed) and gpu interaction. While single core is often more essential it is concerning that there are few multi-threaded tests where the fx would excel. Not to mention all tests mean nothing if they don't run the games.
John Elfman (11:23 AM, May 21, 2016)
true
Don (06:46 PM, April 27, 2016)
This is a no contest. i3 is much better...
comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss