In Atomfall, the Core i3-6300 is slightly faster than the FX-8320. However, it's a slightly worse value for money, as it's $12 more expensive!
Core i3-6300
- Up to 9% faster in Atomfall – 204 vs 188 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 59% less energy – 51 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 59% less energy
FX-8320
- Up to 12% cheaper – $88.10 vs $99.98
- Up to 12% cheaper
- Up to 6% better value in Atomfall – $0.46 vs $0.49/FPS
- Up to 6% better value in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-6300 vs FX-8320: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-6300
Sep 1st, 2015
Average FPS
204 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
153 FPS
100%
Price, $
$99.98
88%
Value, $/FPS
$0.49/FPS
94%
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
188 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
92%
Price, $
$88.1
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.46/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-6300 vs FX-8320 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-6300 vs FX-8320 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-6300
Sep 1st, 2015
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-6300 Sep 1st, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | $169.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
51W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| Intel HD 530 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
