CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2400 vs 6300

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Cinebench R11.5, Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

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?

Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

Winner
Intel Core i5 2400 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 2400  based on its .

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

Intel Core i5 2400

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 2400

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 2400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2400

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much higher Maximum Operating Temperature 72.6 °C vs 62.5 °C More than 15% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Significantly better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score 1.36 vs 1.07 More than 25% better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,719 vs 1,446 Around 20% better PassMark (Single core) score
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1.33 MB/core Around 15% more l3 cache per core
Slightly better cinebench r10 32Bit score 19,179 vs 16,213 Around 20% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
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
Significantly higher turbo clock speed 4.1 GHz vs 3.4 GHz More than 20% higher turbo clock speed
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More cores 6 vs 4 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score 7,541 vs 3,244.5 More than 2.2x better PassMark (Overclocked) score
Much better performance per dollar 6.54 pt/$ vs 2.91 pt/$ Around 2.2x better performance per dollar
More threads 6 vs 4 2 more threads
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.78 GHz vs 3.57 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower typical power consumption 77.19W vs 93.6W Around 20% lower typical power consumption
Marginally newer Oct, 2012 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 1 years later
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.83 GHz vs 3.8 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year vs 100.92 $/year Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year vs 27.75 $/year Around 20% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 2400 vs FX 6300

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 2400
8,276
FX 6300
7,498

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i5 2400
5,990
FX 6300
6,080
Core i5 2400 FX 6300 @ community.futuremark.com

Cinebench R11.5

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)

Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)

FX 6300
1.07

Passmark (Single Core)

Core i5 2400
1,719
FX 6300
1,446

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 2400  vs
FX 6300 
Clock speed 3.1 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.4 GHz 4.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Hexa core
Socket type
LGA 1155
AM3+
Is unlocked No 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
SSE3
FMA3
SSE2
FMA4
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 2000 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 850 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 21,333.32 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s

details

Core i5 2400  vs
FX 6300 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 6
L2 cache 1 MB 6 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1.33 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.6°C Unknown - 62.5°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 63 82
Overclocked clock speed 3.57 GHz 4.78 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.8 GHz 4.83 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 3,244.5 7,541
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.57 GHz 4.78 GHz

power consumption

TDP 95W 95W
Annual home energy cost 27.75 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 100.92 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 6.57 pt/W 7.57 pt/W
Typical power consumption 93.6W 77.19W
Intel Core i5 2400
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus