In Atomfall, the Xeon E5-2650 is slightly faster than the FX-6300. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $89 more expensive!
Xeon E5-2650
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 189 vs 188 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
FX-6300
- Is 7 months and 17 days newer – Oct 23, 2012 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 7 months and 17 days newer
- Up to 69% cheaper – $40.65 vs $129.94
- Up to 69% cheaper
- Up to 69% better value in Atomfall – $0.21 vs $0.68/FPS
- Up to 69% better value in Atomfall
- 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 E5-2650 vs FX-6300: Comparison of performance and price
Xeon E5-2650
Mar 6th, 2012
Average FPS
189 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
100%
Price, $
$129.94
31%
Value, $/FPS
$0.68/FPS
31%
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
188 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
100%
Price, $
$40.65
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon E5-2650 vs FX-6300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon E5-2650 vs FX-6300 in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon E5-2650
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2 GHz
57%
Turbo Frequency
2.8 GHz
68%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
FX-6300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
6-core
75%
L3 Cache
8 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon E5-2650 Mar 6th, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-6300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | $132.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA2011 | Socket | AM3+ |
| 95W | 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 |
