Thread: Fx-6300 Vs 3470

  1. #1
    Stood in the Fire Ekkoeu's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    354

    Fx-6300 Vs 3470

    There's a $100 difference between the 3470 and Fs600 two where I am, and they both seem to pump out around the same amount of speed according to pc mark:

    http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

    Which one would you guys choose?

  2. #2
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Firstly, Passmark is usually a very poor benchmark for determining if a CPU would be good or bad for you. Especially for games.

    Secondly, ....what's an "FS600"? Or am I being stupid and missing something obvious here.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  3. #3
    Brewmaster Biernot's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,431
    He probably means the FX-6300.
    But yeah, the linked benchmark says very little about gaming performance, especially for WoW. (Where the i5 would be a good deal faster)
    Why do something simple, when there is a complicated way?
    Ryzen 7 2700X | BeQuiet Dark Rock Pro 4 | 16GB DDR4-3200 | MSI X470 Gaming Pro | MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G | 500GB / 750GB Crucial SSD
    Fractal Define C | LG 32UK550 | Das Model S Professional Silent | CM Storm Xornet

  4. #4
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Biernot View Post
    He probably means the FX-6300.
    If that's the case, what you pay for is what you get, especially in WoW. Even the i3's outperform the FXs (until you overclock them)
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  5. #5
    Stood in the Fire Ekkoeu's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    354
    lol, I'm being stupid, not slept much. I noticed Chaud recommended Fx6300 on the cheaper setups, that's why I asked. What do you guys usually check for WoW ; Tom'shardware tests?

    I didn't know it wasn't good for testing gaming performance, thanks for informing me.

  6. #6
    i5 3470 is better in WoW because it has better IPC, ie, instructions per clock cycle. Meaning it would be faster, per thread, at the same clock speeds.

    Assuming you are not comfortable overclocking. If you are, the tables shift into the FX-6300 favour.

    EDIT: Oh, also. I editted the title.
    Last edited by BicycleMafioso; 2013-07-03 at 04:56 AM.
     

  7. #7
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    I still have a hard time recommending an FX-6300. On a budget, it's good, however an i3-3220 would let you upgrade later to a 3570K (with proper board). The only time I could really suggest an FX-6300 is if you truly believe that you won't upgrade in the next couple years, and can't scrouge up the extra $150 now or soon for a 3570K

    Basically..
    FX-6300 < i3-3220 < i5-3470 < FX-6300 OC < i5-3570K < i5-3570K OC

    Between weakest and strongest, we're only looking at a total build difference of about $150.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  8. #8
    Stood in the Fire slasher0161's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    North QLD, Australia
    Posts
    425
    Trust us here when we say ipc counts, I have been testing an A8-6600k and thus far it has performed fairly reasonable within most games with a 7870xt as the gpu, however in wow it is tanking hard @1080p simply due to poor ipc of the architecture. I can't forsee getting 25m content "playable" (min 30fps) without dipping the settings something shocking. Trust me when I say that intel in mmo's destroys amd.
    Personal rig:
    • i5-3570k (4.2ghz) || CM hyper 212 evo || Asrock extreme 4 || Corsair (2 x 4gb 1600mhz) ram
    • Samsung 840 (120gb) || WD blue 1tb || WD green 1tb
    • Powercolor 7870xt || Silverstone strider 500w ||NZXT source 210

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    FX-6300 < i3-3220 < i5-3470 < FX-6300 OC < i5-3570K < i5-3570K OC
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/62?i=701.702.289.699

    Unless the FX-6300 can be overclocked to push a 52% performance increase, a FX-6300 OC is not better than an i5-3470 for WoW.

    There's a good chance the FX-6300 OC can't even beat the i3-3220 in WoW.

  10. #10
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    17,222
    I think Anandtech does a great reviews and benchmarks, however those particular benchmarks with WoW are not only outdated, but not close to what I've seen on just about every other websites benchmarks. The gap is not -that- large from what I've seen, and the only case of a large gap normally is when you overclock.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    I think Anandtech does a great reviews and benchmarks, however those particular benchmarks with WoW are not only outdated, but not close to what I've seen on just about every other websites benchmarks. The gap is not -that- large from what I've seen, and the only case of a large gap normally is when you overclock.
    Source to back that up?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •