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?

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 i5 3470

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3470

Report a correction
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 9,265 vs 7,532 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
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
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 performance per dollar 6.66 pt/$ vs 4.49 pt/$ Around 50% better performance per dollar
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.79 GHz vs 3.82 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
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) 4.8 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

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 3470 vs FX 6300

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 3470
9,265
FX 6300
7,532

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i5 3470
6,100
FX 6300
6,080
Core i5 3470 FX 6300 @ community.futuremark.com

Cinebench R11.5

FX 6300
4.92
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).
Core i5 3470 | by PCMag (May, 2012)

Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)

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 (Single Core)

Core i5 3470
1,906
FX 6300
1,446

Reviews Word on the street

Core i5 3470  vs FX 6300 

6.0
8.0
That said you don't really need to have an overclocking mobo to push the Core i5 up over 4.5GHz and gaming performance will quickly outstrip the AMD chip.
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 4.79 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.98 GHz 4.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.82 GHz 4.79 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 7.94 pt/W 7.71 pt/W
Typical power consumption 86.05W 77.19W
Intel Core i5 3470
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
amd has lost.... broken arm.... :D hahaha
comments powered by Disqus