This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Is the AMD FX 6300 bad for gaming?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Is the AMD FX 6300 bad for gaming?

User Info: PhilOnDez

PhilOnDez
2 years ago#11
Play with 12 civs and you'll see turns start to take forever. You've got 26 hours played, how many games is that, 2? 2.5?
Every time I try to go where I really wanna be it's already where I am, 'cuz I'm already there
XBL, PSN, Steam, Origin, BSN, GFAQs, MC: PhilOnDez

User Info: DarkZV2Beta

DarkZV2Beta
2 years ago#12
Pengu1n posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Not exactly. It's certainly terrible for a lot of kinds of gaming, like if you play competitive online games. For casual/light/console gaming, though, it's not bad.


Really? I have played loads of high end games online with mine and had no issues. I have also had no issues whatsoever with ANY pc games i have played using it either.

I don't know where people on this board get their info about AMD from but it's all wrong.


Having no standards isn't the same has having no issues.
god invented extension cords. -elchris79
Starcraft 2 has no depth or challenge -GoreGross

User Info: godplaysSNES

godplaysSNES
2 years ago#13
The FX 6300 is alright in games that are using more than four cores/threads, but its slow single threaded performance isn't something one simply can overlook.
It just isn't that good for games like Starcraft 2 and Crysis 1.
Super Mario Kart is the single best Mario Kart ever!

User Info: TropicMoon10

TropicMoon10
2 years ago#14
DarkZV2Beta posted...
Having no standards isn't the same has having no issues.


Now this is just a stubborn response.
http://i.imgur.com/N9lTE.jpg

User Info: Pengu1n

Pengu1n
2 years ago#15
godplaysSNES posted...
The FX 6300 is alright in games that are using more than four cores/threads, but its slow single threaded performance isn't something one simply can overlook.
It just isn't that good for games like Starcraft 2 and Crysis 1.


Crysis 1 runs just fine. Considering it's an un-optimised mess that still to this day won't run properly i have it at 1080p with the game patched to the latest version and settings on very high and maxed out motion blur and i get a more than playable fps with minor slowdown here and there but not in a way that hinders gameplay.

Haven't tested starcraft 2 as i don't have it.

EDIT

Not my gameplay but SC2 running on an FX6300 witha 1GB video card.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikhPn9oK_EI
FX 6300, HYPER 212 EVO, 16GB DDR3, 7870 GHZ 2GB, 2TB HDD, 64 GB SATA III SSD, 12X BLU RAY, 750W PSU, X-FI FATAL1TY,WINDOWS 7

User Info: Loshadt

Loshadt
2 years ago#16
Generally you only want to get an AMD CPU on a budget, as far as pure video game performance goes it is objectively inferior to an Intel CPU, especially with emulation.
Remember to hug you're waifu.

User Info: darkdragon_9600

darkdragon_9600
2 years ago#17
My 6300 holds nicely. I would have gone Intel if I had the money, but it was around half the pice of an I3 here, so I went with it.

It does fall behind on CPU heavy games, but I'd say it's not terrible or disapointing. Then again, I got a great deal :3
Only by cooking with tin foil can one get something so half-baked.

User Info: smelly_boob

smelly_boob
2 years ago#18
when comparing to intels that are priced 2 times as much as the 6300... its not like the intel is going to get you 2 times the performance.... you're talking about 5-15 fps... right? most everything is still GPU dependant

User Info: Pengu1n

Pengu1n
2 years ago#19
smelly_boob posted...
when comparing to intels that are priced 2 times as much as the 6300... its not like the intel is going to get you 2 times the performance.... you're talking about 5-15 fps... right? most everything is still GPU dependant


From what i have read/seen the difference when intel is faster is only by a couple of FPS So a game that runs at 30fps on AMD may run at 31 or 32fps with intel. Either way it's not worth spending the extra just for a few more fps.
FX 6300, HYPER 212 EVO, 16GB DDR3, 7870 GHZ 2GB, 2TB HDD, 64 GB SATA III SSD, 12X BLU RAY, 750W PSU, X-FI FATAL1TY,WINDOWS 7

User Info: PhilOnDez

PhilOnDez
2 years ago#20
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Torchlight.png

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/BF4-D3D.png


Yeah, 1-2 FPS.
Every time I try to go where I really wanna be it's already where I am, 'cuz I'm already there
XBL, PSN, Steam, Origin, BSN, GFAQs, MC: PhilOnDez
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. Is the AMD FX 6300 bad for gaming?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived