Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › fx 6350 vs 8320
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

fx 6350 vs 8320 - Page 2

post #11 of 149
3M/4M x 5GHZ/4GHZ=94% - 120%=5GHZ/4GHZ

It really is that simple wink.gif (varies by workload)

I bought the FX-6300+120V+UD3P combined for $210. The FX-8350 is usually ~$190 here? Good value IMO.


As an example of the "worst case" scenario for the FX-6300 compared to the FX-8350.

The FX-8350 will compile Linux Kernel version 3.1 in 85 seconds.
My FX-6300 will compile Linux Kernel version 3.1 in 89 seconds.
The i7-3770K will compile Linux Kernel version 3.1 in 91 seconds.
The i7-4770K (the one everyone claims doesn't make any difference, and is all iGPU and power related), does it in 74 seconds blushsmiley.gif
Edited by mdocod - 3/2/14 at 1:48pm
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdocod View Post

At stock clocks, the FX-8320 typically performs up to 10% better than the FX-6300 in highly threaded games. (like BF4). Performance scaling to parallel CPU hardware is only linear when the workload is not tied to real-time. It's easy to saturate parallel hardware while compiling or folding or rendering graphics that are NOT in real-time. As soon as real-time is in play, performance scaling on highly parallel hardware will always be less than ideal. There is no getting around this, but there is also nothing wrong with this. [re-emphasize THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS] Having highly parallel hardware clocked low and efficient, with partial utilization, regulated by TDP limits will undoubtedly be the "future." Look at cell phones and tablets.... In any case, with this "up to 10%" difference in performance in mind at stock clocks, consider the following:

Once you deviate from stock clocks, there is no difference in binning between a 95W FX-6300 and 125W FX-6350. You stand an equal chance of getting a good or bad overclocker with either of these chips IMO. The voltage/clock relationship between 3.5ghz@95W and 3.9GHZ@125W is no different. You could interchange any of these FX-63XX chips, flip flop the default P-states and clocks and they would be stable, and they would have "switched" TDP ratings. (a "95W" FX-6300 with a +0.1V VID adjustment, and 400mhz overclock will use ~125W full load).

The price jump from the FX-6300 to the FX-6350 buys this:
instead of this:

If you're not using the stock HSF, and plan to overclock, then the FX-6350 is not cost effective because you are going to effectively "toss out" the only thing that you paid extra for. So what you really need to look at, is what the difference in price between the FX-6300 and FX-8320 will buy you in heat-sinking, or motherboard, or GPU.

I have a theory regarding what sort of overclocking and low-voltage stability to expect when buying a low end 8 core, vs any 4 or 6 core part:
When chip yields are good, most of the chips off the assembly line would pass as an FX-8320 or better. So when it comes time to make FX-6300s, you just take the "worst module" of a chip and "chop" it off. Read through the FX-83XX and FX-9XXX owners threads and overclocking threads and you'll find that it's almost always one module that stands out as the constant offender, throwing errors in stability testing and holding back the OC for the rest of the chip. In the process of making FX-4XXX and FX-6XXX series chips, they may be weeding out the worst offending modules. The "chopping block" may serve as a way to convert a mediocre 8-core part, into a potentially very good 4 or 6 core part. Look at the sort of clocks and VIDs that are common on FX-6300 parts (a popular cheap tuner cpu) and you'll see, that "docking a module" seems to be like trimming the fat and serving up just the loin. I could be totally off base here, but when you look at the sort of voltage it takes to get most 8 core chips to 5ghz, and then look at mot FX-6300 5ghz OCs by comparison, it becomes obvious that docking a module has a positive effect on overclocking, and there's reason to believe that they may in fact be selecting which modules to chop with some degree of scrutiny.

Given equal cooling (the H80), I expect you'll be able to overclock an average FX-6300 10% higher than an average FX-8320. The only time the FX-8320 would be faster then, would be under fully saturated workloads (unusual in gaming or Photoshop to be honest).

YMMW,
Best Regards,
Eric


Very good read.
post #13 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdocod View Post

At stock clocks, the FX-8320 typically performs up to 10% better than the FX-6300 in highly threaded games. (like BF4). Performance scaling to parallel CPU hardware is only linear when the workload is not tied to real-time. It's easy to saturate parallel hardware while compiling or folding or rendering graphics that are NOT in real-time. As soon as real-time is in play, performance scaling on highly parallel hardware will always be less than ideal. There is no getting around this, but there is also nothing wrong with this. [re-emphasize THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS] Having highly parallel hardware clocked low and efficient, with partial utilization, regulated by TDP limits will undoubtedly be the "future." Look at cell phones and tablets.... In any case, with this "up to 10%" difference in performance in mind at stock clocks, consider the following:

Once you deviate from stock clocks, there is no difference in binning between a 95W FX-6300 and 125W FX-6350. You stand an equal chance of getting a good or bad overclocker with either of these chips IMO. The voltage/clock relationship between 3.5ghz@95W and 3.9GHZ@125W is no different. You could interchange any of these FX-63XX chips, flip flop the default P-states and clocks and they would be stable, and they would have "switched" TDP ratings. (a "95W" FX-6300 with a +0.1V VID adjustment, and 400mhz overclock will use ~125W full load).

It seems that a 6300 will give you the same FPS as an 8320 cpu even in highly threaded games like Cry 3, BF3/4 at the same clock speeds with 1 gpu. I believe the Crysis 3 charts on the Russian site support this. The 6300 is about 6 frames slower than the 8320 8350 at stock clocks, so overclocking to it 4.0 should match the octo-core or am i missing something?
Edited by diggiddi - 4/2/14 at 7:22am
FX Klasse
(25 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD FX 8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 MSI R9 290X Lightning MSI R9 290X Lightning 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Corsair  Corsair  g.skill sniper gaming series 16gb 2400mhz ddr3 WD 1 TB  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
WD 320 GB OCZ vertex 3 64GB Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Seagate 250 GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Crucial MX300 525 GB Samsung SH-S223L Cooler Master Glacer 240l Windows 8.1 Pro N 64 bit 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 Pro 64 bit AOC 2462w Lenovo L2261wA Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCG 750 Rosewill Future corsair vengeance m65 Turtle Beach Montego DDL 
Other
Altec Lansing ADA 995 
  hide details  
Reply
FX Klasse
(25 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD FX 8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 MSI R9 290X Lightning MSI R9 290X Lightning 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
Corsair  Corsair  g.skill sniper gaming series 16gb 2400mhz ddr3 WD 1 TB  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
WD 320 GB OCZ vertex 3 64GB Samsung 840 Pro 128GB Seagate 250 GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Crucial MX300 525 GB Samsung SH-S223L Cooler Master Glacer 240l Windows 8.1 Pro N 64 bit 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 10 Pro 64 bit AOC 2462w Lenovo L2261wA Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCG 750 Rosewill Future corsair vengeance m65 Turtle Beach Montego DDL 
Other
Altec Lansing ADA 995 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 149
Spend the extra $50 and go for the 8350.
post #15 of 149
LOL,
Even though I advised above to get the 8320, I did buy the 6300, for the reasons stated by mdocod.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX6300 Black M5A99X EVO R2.0 Nvidia GTS450 Team Vulcan PC3 12800 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 PRO Asus DRW-1608P (x2) Custom Water Cooling Win7 (Ult), Win 8.1 & Win Server 2012 R2 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2 X Samsung 915N Ducky Shine III, Blue Cherry/Blue LEDs PCP&C 1kw Lian Li PC-71 (W/Window) 
MouseAudio
Logiteck G400s none 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX6300 Black M5A99X EVO R2.0 Nvidia GTS450 Team Vulcan PC3 12800 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 PRO Asus DRW-1608P (x2) Custom Water Cooling Win7 (Ult), Win 8.1 & Win Server 2012 R2 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2 X Samsung 915N Ducky Shine III, Blue Cherry/Blue LEDs PCP&C 1kw Lian Li PC-71 (W/Window) 
MouseAudio
Logiteck G400s none 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by billbartuska View Post

LOL,
Even though I advised above to get the 8320, I did buy the 6300, for the reasons stated by mdocod.
But in games the FX 8320 will have the lead, right ?
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 149
Depends on which game. In quite a few reviews, Ive seen the lowly FX-4XXX on top.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300 @ 4.9ghz M5A99X EVO R2.0 PNY 2gb NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 PNY DDR3-1600 9-9-9-24 2X4gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Intel 330 SSD Samsung HD103SI Samsung HD204UI X 2 esata externals  Western Digital WD5000AAKX  
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Optiarc DVD RW AD-7280S Cooler Master Hyper 212 plus Windows 8.1.1 pro with media center Funai 32inch LED HDTV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 Corsair CX600 Custom twin full tower, 12 - 5 1/4 bays total Logitech M510 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Combo Mouse Pad, Calculator, USB ports USB stereo speakers Custom 5.1 digital sound system 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300 @ 4.9ghz M5A99X EVO R2.0 PNY 2gb NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 PNY DDR3-1600 9-9-9-24 2X4gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Intel 330 SSD Samsung HD103SI Samsung HD204UI X 2 esata externals  Western Digital WD5000AAKX  
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Optiarc DVD RW AD-7280S Cooler Master Hyper 212 plus Windows 8.1.1 pro with media center Funai 32inch LED HDTV 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 Corsair CX600 Custom twin full tower, 12 - 5 1/4 bays total Logitech M510 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Combo Mouse Pad, Calculator, USB ports USB stereo speakers Custom 5.1 digital sound system 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpmee View Post

Depends on which game.

+1
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX6300 Black M5A99X EVO R2.0 Nvidia GTS450 Team Vulcan PC3 12800 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 PRO Asus DRW-1608P (x2) Custom Water Cooling Win7 (Ult), Win 8.1 & Win Server 2012 R2 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2 X Samsung 915N Ducky Shine III, Blue Cherry/Blue LEDs PCP&C 1kw Lian Li PC-71 (W/Window) 
MouseAudio
Logiteck G400s none 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX6300 Black M5A99X EVO R2.0 Nvidia GTS450 Team Vulcan PC3 12800 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 PRO Asus DRW-1608P (x2) Custom Water Cooling Win7 (Ult), Win 8.1 & Win Server 2012 R2 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2 X Samsung 915N Ducky Shine III, Blue Cherry/Blue LEDs PCP&C 1kw Lian Li PC-71 (W/Window) 
MouseAudio
Logiteck G400s none 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 149
So which is better 4 cores at 4.8Ghz or 6 cores at 4.4Ghz?
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason387 View Post

So which is better 4 cores at 4.8Ghz or 6 cores at 4.4Ghz?

2 cores @5.5GHz, 1 core @6GHz

Actually 6 cores @4.4Ghz would be where I'd leave it.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5-1680 V2  R4BE  TITAN X (Pascal)   2666 Dominator Platinum CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
750 NVMe 1.2TB EK HF/rx360/rx120 EK FC/GTs/mcp655 Windows 10 Pro  
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
BL3200PT 1600 T2 800d Pro Audio 2.1 + DragonFly Red 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5-1680 V2  R4BE  TITAN X (Pascal)   2666 Dominator Platinum CL10 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
750 NVMe 1.2TB EK HF/rx360/rx120 EK FC/GTs/mcp655 Windows 10 Pro  
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
BL3200PT 1600 T2 800d Pro Audio 2.1 + DragonFly Red 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › fx 6350 vs 8320