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 4590

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4590

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Front view of AMD FX 6300

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6300

Report a correction
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 4590 vs FX 6300

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4590
10,601
FX 6300
7,871

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4590
3,345
FX 6300
2,053

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4590
4,650,000 MB/s
FX 6300
2,290,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4590
10,266
FX 6300
7,447

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 4590
11,085
FX 6300
8,232

GeekBench

Core i5 4590
11,085
FX 6300
9,503

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i5 4590
7,229
FX 6300
6,444

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i5 4590
2,113
FX 6300
1,446

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 4590  vs
FX 6300 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.7 GHz 4.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Hexa core
Socket type
LGA 1150
AM3+
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 84W 95W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 10.33 pt/W 9.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 77.19W

details

Core i5 4590  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 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 33 20
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 62.5°C

overclocking

PassMark (Overclocked) 2,861.9 7,541

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
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i5 4590
Report a correction
AMD FX 6300
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 4 comments.
Im using Fx 6300 and I can't get enough performance. Prefer Intel always. I tried and I get it.
CPUBoos é puxa saco da Intel!
Intel 100%. If you decide to OC the AMD the best you could get with a good air cooler is 4.5 ghz. OC with a GOOD water cooler then you can get to 5ghz. This is vs an Intel that turbos to 3.7ghz with a stock cooler. Intel also has better performance overall even with 2 less 'cores' than the fx-6300. The cheap price of the AMD goes down the drain when you have to by a water cooler and also more watt PSU for the OC, aswell as a mid range mobo.
It's interesting how these two CPU's stack up, the Intel does actual win out because most people don't O/C and only if you're a gamer does the 6 core AMD win out. Since I use computers for gaming and more than gaming, Audio pro, video editing and general usage I think intel's stability and faster speed per core works better. I hope others can write in about these two, I'm going with the intel, there's a old saying, stability over speed is better, especially with your computer, don't want to burn up the power supply if I don't have enough power.
comments powered by Disqus