Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD FX 6300 |
Released June, 2012
Intel Core i5 3470
- 3.2 GHz
- Quad core
8.2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i5 3470
 | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms |
| | Much better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score 1.52 | | Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,906 |
by PCMag (May, 2012)The Intel Core i5-3470 is a mainstream Ivy Bridge CPU that delivers solid performance with very few surprises (and limited overclocking opportunities).
VS
Released October, 2012
AMD FX 6300
- 3.5 GHz
- Hexa core
- Unlocked
7.7 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD FX 6300
| | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | | Is unlocked Yes |
| | Significantly higher turbo clock speed 4.1 GHz | | Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz |
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)It's not far off in terms of gaming, with our low-end Batman: AC scores showing 155fps for the FX-6300 versus 164FPS for the stock-clocked i5-3570K.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3470 vs 6300
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Cinebench R11.5, Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit) | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Cinebench R11.5 (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core) | |
Overclocking | |
How much speed can you get out of the processor? | |
| Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score | 1.52 | vs | 1.07 | More than 40% better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,906 | vs | 1,446 | More than 30% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Higher Maximum Operating Temperature | 67.4 °C | vs | 62.5 °C | Around 10% higher Maximum Operating Temperature | |||
| Better geekbench (32-bit) score | 9,261 | vs | 7,539 | Around 25% better geekbench (32-bit) score | |||
| Better cinebench r11.5 score | 5.71 | vs | 4.92 | More than 15% better cinebench r11.5 score | |||
| More l3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | vs | 1.33 MB/core | Around 15% more l3 cache per core | |||
| |||||||
| 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 | |||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 4.1 GHz | vs | 3.6 GHz | Around 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher clock speed | 3.5 GHz | vs | 3.2 GHz | Around 10% 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 | |||
| More threads | 6 | vs | 4 | 2 more threads | |||
| Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.82 GHz | vs | 3.82 GHz | More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better performance per dollar | 6.16 pt/$ | vs | 4.52 pt/$ | More than 35% better performance per dollar | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 77.19W | vs | 86.05W | More than 10% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 31.22 $/year | More than 25% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.79 GHz | vs | 3.98 GHz | More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Marginally newer | Oct, 2012 | vs | Jun, 2012 | Release date 4 months later | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 3470 vs FX 6300
GeekBench (32-bit)
3D Mark 11 (Physics)
Cinebench R11.5
Core i5 3470 | by PCMag (May, 2012)CineBench R11.5 returned a multicore CPU score of 5.67 for the newer CPU and 5.41 for the older one, with an even tighter gap present between the two when we only used one CPU for the test (1.48 for the Core i5-2500K, 1.51 for the Core i5-3470).
Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)
FX 6300 | by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)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.
Passmark
Passmark (Single Core)
Reviews Word on the street
| Core i5 3470 | vs | FX 6300 | ||
 | FX 6300 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i5 3470 | vs | FX 6300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.6 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 2500 | N/A | |
| Latest DirectX | 11.0 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 650 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,100 MHz | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1866 | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
details | Core i5 3470 | 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 | 22 nms | 32 nms | |
| Transistor count | 1,400,000,000 | 1,600,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 67.4°C | Unknown - 62.5°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 22 | 82 | |
| Overclock review score | 0.7 | 0.8 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.82 GHz | 4.82 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.98 GHz | 4.79 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.82 GHz | 4.82 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 77W | 95W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 31.22 $/year | 22.89 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 84.62 $/year | 83.22 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 8.01 pt/W | 7.78 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 86.05W | 77.19W | |
 Intel Core i5 3470  Report a correction |  AMD FX 6300 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $195 | ||
| AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $230 | $120 | |
| Intel Core i5 3570K vs AMD FX 6300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $120 | $120 | |
| Intel Core i3 4130 vs AMD FX 6300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $150 | $120 | |
| AMD FX 8320 vs 6300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $125 | $120 | |
| Intel Core i3 4150 vs AMD FX 6300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $140 | $120 | |
| AMD FX 6350 vs 6300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $180 | $120 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs 6300 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $334 | $313 | |
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
 | VS | |
| $340 | $313 | |
| Intel 4790K vs Core i7 4770K | ||
 | VS | |
| $195 | $313 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790 vs 4770K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $378 | ||
| Intel Core i7 4700MQ vs AMD A10 5750M | ||
 | VS | |
| $235 | $180 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $393 | $281 | |
| Intel Core i7 4500U vs i5 4200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $225 | $281 | |
| Intel Core i5 4200M vs 4200U | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 1 comment.
