Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 7950X3D outperforms FX-6300 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 9 7950X3D is 3725 days newer than FX-6300.
Advantages of FX-6300
- Consumes up to 21% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D - 95 vs 120 Watts
Advantages of Ryzen 9 7950X3D
- Performs up to 32% better in A Plague Tale: Requiem than FX-6300 - 156 vs 118 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6300 - 32 vs 6 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
A Plague Tale: Requiem
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
FPS
156
100%
Value, £/FPS
£4.1/FPS
100%
Price, £
£639.99
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £639.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 133 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
FX-6300 | vs | Ryzen 9 7950X3D |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2023 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Vishera | Codename | Raphael |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM5 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 16 |
6 | Threads | 32 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.7 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 120 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 5 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 42.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |