Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper FX-6300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 2746 days newer than the cheaper FX-6300.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 15% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-6300 - 193 vs 168 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-6300 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6300 - 20 vs 6 threads
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Up to 48% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - $93.62 vs $178.41
- Up to 40% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-10900F - $0.62 vs $1.03 per FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
193
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.03/FPS
60%
Price, €
€198.04
52%
FPS Winner
Buy for €198.04 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 139 minutes ago
Buy for €103.92 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 139 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-10900F | vs | AMD FX-6300 |
---|---|---|
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 | 6 |
20 | Threads | 6 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |