Key Differences
In short — Core i9-13900K 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 i9-13900K is 3626 days newer than the cheaper FX-8300.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-13900K
- Performs up to 42% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than FX-8300 - 163 vs 115 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8300 - 32 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8300
- Up to 86% cheaper than Core i9-13900K - €73.57 vs €528.89
- Up to 80% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i9-13900K - €0.64 vs €3.24 per FPS
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i9-13900K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
FPS
163
100%
Value, €/FPS
€3.24/FPS
19%
Price, €
€528.89
13%
FPS Winner
Buy for €528.89 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 323 minutes ago
Buy for €73.57 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 323 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-13900K | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
---|---|---|
Sep 27th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Core i9 | Collection | FX |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
24 | Cores | 8 |
32 | Threads | 8 |
3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
5.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 95 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
30.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |