In Atomfall, the FX-6300 is slightly faster than the Xeon W3530. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
FX-6300
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 187 vs 186 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
- Is 2 years and 7 months newer – Oct 23, 2012 vs Mar 16, 2010
- Is 2 years and 7 months newer
- Consumes up to 27% less energy – 95 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 27% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon W3530
No clear advantages
Atomfall FPS Calculator
FX-6300 vs Xeon W3530: Comparison of performance and price
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
187 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$40.65
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-6300 vs Xeon W3530 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-6300 vs Xeon W3530 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Xeon W3530
Mar 16th, 2010
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
80%
Turbo Frequency
3.066 GHz
75%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-6300 Oct 23rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon W3530 Mar 16th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2010 |
| $132.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1366 |
95W | Power Consumption | 130W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
