💪 AMD FD6300WMHKBOX FX-6300 Black Edition: 6-Core Processor with Unparalleled Performance Review
134
·
Very good
Rating
4.8
🧰 Computer Internal Components, 💻 Computer Components
Media
(2)
Details
| Brand | AMD |
|---|---|
| CPU Manufacturer | AMD |
| CPU Model | AMD FX |
| CPU Speed | 3.5 GHz |
| CPU Socket | Socket AM3 |
Description of 💪 AMD FD6300WMHKBOX FX-6300 Black Edition: 6-Core Processor with Unparalleled Performance
Frequency: 3.5/4.1 GHZ (Base/Overdrive). Power Wattage: 95W. Cache: 6/8MB (L2/L3). Socket Type: AM3+. Frequency: 3.5/4.1ghz (base/overdrive). Cores: 6; Supported technologies: aes, avx, fma4. Cache: 6/8mb (l2/l3). Socket type: am3+. Power wattage: 95w.
Pros
- FX-6350 Final, I bought it almost three years ago and the price hasn't dropped much at all. It has a 970 chipset (mother asus M5A97 r2-0), and when I set the frequency to 4500, the flight is normal, and it works reliably. Keeps up with higher-frequency CPUs that are more powerful
Cons
- Ignore the warnings that the processor only needs a 125W cooler or it would overheat; I ended up cranking the cooling up to 150 or 165W. The end result of a 55C * load and an overclock from 3900 to 4500. 300-320 H/s Crypto Mining Attempts
Pros
- 1. A dependable CPU; 2. The best cost-to-quality ratio, taking the current exchange rate into consideration; 3. A full 6 cores at 4.1 Ghz in steady automated overclocking.
Cons
- 1. The cost of purchasing a more-or-less good cooler that can cool the ardent temper of the FX-6300 offsets the low price compared to more expensive counterparts in terms of performance from Intel, where the price tag is raised for an unnecessary integrated video core (but this is necessary for those who will load their CPU to the eyeballs; for regular people, cooling is sufficient for 600-800).
Pros
- Productive, stylish in multithreading, fully game-percent, inexpensive, cold (above 65g did not warm up in linx), unlocked multiplier, and not cut relative to the top 8350 (only tdp is higher; apparently the less successful chip is sent to 8320, and the more successful chip is sent to 8350; therefore, it is preferable for overclockers to take the top). manufactured in a plant located near Dresden. : D
Cons
- consumes a significant amount of resources in a single thread, including energy (32nm process technology), and intelligence. Only a select few games, such as Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3, are capable of fully utilizing such a large number of processor cores. As a side note, beta Battlefield 4 is also highly tuned for multi-core, which means that vanguard may make a decent profit off of fx-s in this game.
Pros
- Affordable, quite productive, able to handle many threads, and equipped with four physical cores. Unlocking the multiplier for use.
Cons
- "hot" in terms of the intelligence gathered. When compared to the OEM version, the Box version might be up to 700 dollars more expensive.
Pros
- 8320s: 1. Effectively handles activities involving video conversion. Fills up each of the 8 buckets by 90–98%. The ability to multitask is essential. 2. Accelerates smoothly and trouble-freely by 44%, according to my data. 3. The temperature rises but stays within the normal range thanks to the effective cooling. Never experienced any throttling. 4. The price for such a ratio is fantastic, especially when one considers the current value of the currency.
Cons
- No.
Pros
- - The level of performance; - The cost.
Cons
- They are not in this location.
Pros
- Price Performance Heat transfer The amount of energy used is irrelevant to me. 8 cognitive hubs My motherboard's BIOS takes a while longer to load its modules than it does for my SSD to launch Windows 8 (6 seconds). Forgot all about lags and response delays (interface slowdowns).
Cons
- No
Pros
- The FX-8320 is affordable while yet being effective for any task. Even when using CUDA, it connects cores and loads 100% in two-pass avc/h264 video encoding. generally suitable for encoding video. I chose to take a third computer on this platform because all the couples were continuously complaining about AMD. I didn't fail, and I didn't notice anything slow. I measured the BOX's idle core temperatures, which ranged from 9 to 32 to 45 degrees Celsius under the cover. The packaged cooler is therefore not awful. But eventually, I'll undoubtedly invest in a large one for overclocking. Yes, he eats reasonably, but read evaluations of fcentr or elsewhere I forgot to look at professor review sites. In general, I don't understand those who write about consumption. In loads up to 95 watts, Intel does not significantly outperform AMD. In loads up to 125 watts, Intel outperforms AMD. What is the biggest difference here? This is for Intel enthusiasts. It consumes little loads when in idle state (I guess I didn't check how many cores). This is what automatic - 1400 MHz further up to 4000 MHz for two cores and up to 3500 MHz for all cores. (I haven't entered the BIOS yet, and the auto works perfectly.)
Cons
- Even though Dada 32nm is not a true 8x core, it would still be competitive. Although I don't dispute Intel's claim that its processors will be more powerful per core, their prices are exorbitant, which should not be overlooked, and their regularly updated sockets will require eating the mother + percent, perhaps since 2022, processor power hasn't truly increased.
Pros
- Temperature, speed, and capacities
Cons
- It now costs twice as much.
Pros
- Not a steep price in comparison.
Cons
- This is still not a 6-core CPU, but a 3-core one with apparently hyper-trading. For instance, it only has 3 FPUs, not 6, and the working with memory portion of the processor drains at a rate that requires raising the speeds of NB and hypertransport to 2400-2600 and memory to 1866–2133. Without overclocking, the percentage is not relevant; if you don't know how to drive, it's preferable to purchase an i3.
