Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900 outperforms the cheaper FX-8300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900 is 2746 days newer than the cheaper FX-8300.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900
- Performs up to 43% better in Starfield than FX-8300 - 63 vs 44 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-8300 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8300 - 20 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8300
- Up to 77% cheaper than Core i9-10900 - €73.57 vs €315.34
- Up to 67% better value when playing Starfield than Core i9-10900 - €1.67 vs €5.01 per FPS
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €315.34 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11 minutes ago
Buy for €73.57 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-10900 | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Core i9 | Collection | FX |
Comet Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 8 |
20 | Threads | 8 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |