In Atomfall, the Xeon E5-2643 is slightly faster than the FX-8300 and it's also a slightly better value for money, as it's $5 cheaper!
Xeon E5-2643
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall – 192 vs 188 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Atomfall
- Up to 5% cheaper – $100.70 vs $106.06
- Up to 5% cheaper
- Up to 7% better value in Atomfall – $0.52 vs $0.56/FPS
- Up to 7% better value in Atomfall
FX-8300
- Is 7 months and 17 days newer – Oct 23, 2012 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 7 months and 17 days 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
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Xeon E5-2643 vs FX-8300: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-2643
Mar 6th, 2012
Average FPS
192 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
144 FPS
100%
Price, $
$100.7
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.52/FPS
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
188 FPS
98%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
98%
Price, $
$106.06
94%
Value, $/FPS
$0.56/FPS
93%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-2643 vs FX-8300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-2643 vs FX-8300 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-2643
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
4-core
50%
L3 Cache
10 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.5 GHz
90%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
80%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-2643 Mar 6th, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | AM3+ |
| 130W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
