0 Comments
| | Intel G3258 vs AMD FX 6300 |
Released April, 2014
Intel G3258
- 3.2 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel G3258
| | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Better PassMark (Single core) score 2,165 | | Lower typical power consumption 43.06W |
VS
Released October, 2012
AMD FX 6300
- 3.5 GHz
- Hexa core
- Unlocked
Reasons to buy the AMD FX 6300
| | Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz | | Significantly better PassMark (Overclocked) score 7,541 |
| | More cores 6 | | Better PassMark score 6,444 |
by Tech Radar (Dec, 2012)In fact if anything the overclocking performance has been enhanced.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of G3258 vs 6300
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
| |||||||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | 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 | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,165 | vs | 1,446 | Around 50% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 43.06W | vs | 77.19W | Around 45% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Better performance per dollar | 8.93 pt/$ | vs | 6.54 pt/$ | More than 35% better performance per dollar | |||
| Better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | 6,141 | vs | 4,101 | Around 50% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | |||
| Higher Maximum Operating Temperature | 72 °C | vs | 62.5 °C | More than 15% higher Maximum Operating Temperature | |||
| Marginally newer | Apr, 2014 | vs | Oct, 2012 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| Better performance per watt | 11.79 pt/W | vs | 7.57 pt/W | More than 55% better performance per watt | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 46.43 $/year | vs | 83.22 $/year | Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 12.77 $/year | vs | 22.89 $/year | Around 45% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 3.5 GHz | vs | 3.2 GHz | Around 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Overclocked) score | 7,541 | vs | 4,890.2 | Around 55% better PassMark (Overclocked) score | |||
| More cores | 6 | vs | 2 | Three times as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better PassMark score | 6,444 | vs | 4,009 | More than 60% better PassMark score | |||
| Better geekbench (32-bit) score | 7,498 | vs | 5,801 | Around 30% better geekbench (32-bit) score | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.78 GHz | vs | 4.49 GHz | More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better cinebench r10 32Bit score | 16,213 | vs | 11,799 | More than 35% better cinebench r10 32Bit score | |||
Benchmarks Real world tests of G3258 vs FX 6300
Cinebench R10 32-Bit
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.
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | G3258 | vs | FX 6300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Hexa core | |
| 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 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 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 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 21,333.32 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
details | G3258 | vs | FX 6300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 6 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72°C | Unknown - 62.5°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.49 GHz | 4.78 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.8 GHz | 4.83 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 4,890.2 | 7,541 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.49 GHz | 4.78 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 53W | 95W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 12.77 $/year | 22.89 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 46.43 $/year | 83.22 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 11.79 pt/W | 7.57 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 43.06W | 77.19W | |
| Intel G3258 | AMD FX 6300 |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
| VS | |
| $226 | $110 | |
| 3570K vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $120 | $110 | |
| 4150 vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $143 | $110 | |
| 8320 vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $120 | $110 | |
| 4130 vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $170 | $110 | |
| 8350 vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $195 | $110 | |
| 4460 vs 6300 | ||
| VS | |
| $120 | $70 | |
| 4130 vs G3258 | ||
Popular Comparisons
| VS | |
| $247 | $325 | |
| 9590 vs 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $161 | $225 | |
| N3530 vs 3110M | ||
| VS | |
| $225 | ||
| N2830 vs 3217U | ||
| VS | |
| $340 | $325 | |
| 4790K vs 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $97 | $281 | |
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
| VS | |
| $378 | ||
| 4700MQ vs 5750M | ||
| VS | |
| 800 vs 5 Octa | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 11 comments.
Coroi Alexandru Mihai (08:09 PM, October 25, 2014)
Loh Jia Hung (12:11 PM, October 24, 2014)
Racism in Processor?? (02:59 AM, October 23, 2014)
Guest (05:22 PM, October 19, 2014)
I Am Lorde Ya Ya Ya (08:25 PM, October 6, 2014)
Guest (03:29 PM, October 3, 2014)
Guest (01:01 AM, October 1, 2014)
Guest (11:26 AM, September 24, 2014)
Taher (06:25 PM, September 20, 2014)
Ivo Robotnik (05:26 PM, September 17, 2014)
jason (09:27 PM, August 8, 2014)





