Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 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 Core i3-10320 is 2746 days newer than the cheaper FX-6300.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 21% better in Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than FX-6300 - 131 vs 108 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 - 8 vs 6 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Up to 59% cheaper than Core i3-10320 - $58.04 vs $139.99
- Up to 50% better value when playing Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than Core i3-10320 - $0.54 vs $1.07 per FPS
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
131
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.07/FPS
50.46728971962617%
Price, $
$139.99
41%
FPS Winner
Buy for $139.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1609 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
108
82.44274809160305%
Value, $/FPS
$0.54/FPS
100%
Price, $
$58.04
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $58.04 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1602 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | AMD FX-6300 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Core i3 | Collection | FX |
Comet Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 6 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |