Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-6100 outperforms the more expensive FX-6300 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-6100 is 1043 days newer than the more expensive FX-6300.
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-6100 - 6 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-6100
- Performs up to 5% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than FX-6300 - 157 vs 149 FPS
- Up to 22% cheaper than FX-6300 - $100.0 vs $128.04
- Up to 26% better value when playing Red Dead Redemption 2 than FX-6300 - $0.64 vs $0.86 per FPS
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD FX-6300 - 51 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Buy for $128.04 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280524 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
157
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.64/FPS
100%
Price, $
$100
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $100 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280525 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6300 | vs | Intel Core i3-6100 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2015 |
FX | Collection | Core i3 |
Vishera | Codename | Skylake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
6 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
95 W | TDP | 51 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 530 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |