Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 7600 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 Ryzen 5 7600 is 3735 days newer than the cheaper FX-6300.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 7600
- Performs up to 13% better in Dead Space than FX-6300 - 164 vs 145 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 - 12 vs 6 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Up to 76% cheaper than Ryzen 5 7600 - €49.68 vs €207.0
- Up to 73% better value when playing Dead Space than Ryzen 5 7600 - €0.34 vs €1.26 per FPS
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €207 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 83 minutes ago
Buy for €49.68 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 82 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 14th, 2023
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen 5 7600 | vs | AMD FX-6300 |
---|---|---|
Jan 14th, 2023 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Ryzen 5 | Collection | FX |
Raphael | Codename | Vishera |
AMD Socket AM5 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
12 | Threads | 6 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
5.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
5 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
Radeon Graphics | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |