In Atomfall, the Core i3-6300 is slightly faster than the FX-6300. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $56 more expensive!
Core i3-6300
- Up to 9% faster in Atomfall – 203 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 9% faster in Atomfall
- Is 2 years and 10 months newer – Sep 01, 2015 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 2 years and 10 months newer
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 51 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
FX-6300
- Up to 58% cheaper – $40.65 vs $96.52
- Up to 58% cheaper
- Up to 55% better value in Atomfall – $0.21 vs $0.47/FPS
- Up to 55% better value in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-6300 vs FX-6300: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-6300
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
203 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
152 FPS
100%
Price, $
$96.52
42%
Value, $/FPS
$0.47/FPS
45%
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
187 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
92%
Price, $
$40.65
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-6300 vs FX-6300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-6300 vs FX-6300 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-6300
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
87%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-6300 Sep 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | $132.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
51W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD 530 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
