Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-3240 outperforms the more expensive FX-6300 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-3240 is 50 days older than the more expensive FX-6300.
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-3240 - 6 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240
- Performs up to 9% better in League of Legends than FX-6300 - 63 vs 58 FPS
- Up to 58% cheaper than FX-6300 - $29.98 vs $71.68
- Up to 61% better value when playing League of Legends than FX-6300 - $0.48 vs $1.24 per FPS
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than AMD FX-6300 - 55 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
League of Legends
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
58
92.06349206349206%
Value, €/FPS
€1.24/FPS
38.70967741935484%
Price, €
€79.57
41%
Buy for €79.57 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 180 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
63
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.48/FPS
100%
Price, €
€33.28
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €33.28 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 180 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6300 | vs | Intel Core i3-3240 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 3rd, 2012 |
FX | Collection | Core i3 |
Vishera | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
95 W | TDP | 55 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |