Key Differences
In short — Core i9-7940X outperforms the cheaper FX-6300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-7940X is 1774 days newer than the cheaper FX-6300.
Advantages of AMD FX-6300
- Up to 70% cheaper than Core i9-7940X - $128.04 vs $425.0
- Up to 68% better value when playing The Last of Us Part I than Core i9-7940X - $1.01 vs $3.15 per FPS
- Consumes up to 42% less energy than Intel Core i9-7940X - 95 vs 165 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-7940X
- Performs up to 6% better in The Last of Us Part I than FX-6300 - 135 vs 127 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6300 - 28 vs 6 threads
The Last of Us Part I
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
127
94.07407407407408%
Value, $/FPS
$1.01/FPS
100%
Price, $
$128.04
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $128.04 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348611 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2017
FPS
135
100%
Value, $/FPS
$3.15/FPS
32.06349206349206%
Price, $
$425
30%
FPS Winner
Buy for $425 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348611 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6300 | vs | Intel Core i9-7940X |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2017 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Skylake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 14 |
6 | Threads | 28 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 165 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |