Originally Posted by Jeffredo
I have an FX-6300 in one rig (modestly OC'd @ 4.2 Ghz). I also have a trusty old Phenom II X4 980 @ 4.0 Ghz in another. The overall gaming performance with the same GPU seems more or less the same, but the Phenom is a tiny bit smoother in something like Skyrim. The FX-6300 is a heck of a lot cooler running and I was thinking the FX-4300 might be more so - even with a healthy OC. Was thinking about putting one in the X4 980's PC for a bit of energy savings and less heat in the room - but it sounds like it might be counter-productive from a performance standpoint. Would it really take 4.5 Ghz for an FX-4300 to match a Phenom II X4 @ 4.0 Ghz in gaming?
There are people who say that clock for clock the FX cpu's are better then Phenom II's. Vice Versa, there are others who say that the FX cpu's need that few extra hundred MHz to match the Phenom II's slightly better IPC. I have numerous Phenom II's and FX cpu's. Personally I can say that my 6300 at 4200 MHz spanks my 1090T at 4000 MHz. More so than 200 MHz would indicate. I also can say that my 4300 at 4300 MHz bests either my 965 BE or my 960T at 4200 MHz. My A10-5800K seems faster than my 965 BE and 960T for that matter. I do no benchmarking. I don't do much gaming. I just think the FX cpu's multi-task better. Less mouse lag, faster window re-sizing. That sort of thing. I usually have two browsers running. Tons of open tabs, Youtube, iTunes, Prime95, burning cd's etc....