Best Bench: 90% Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 4.55 GHz (avg)Worst Bench: 73% Base clock 3.95 GHz, turbo 3.85 GHz (avg)

You are watching: Amd fx 6300 vs ryzen 5 3600


MemoryAvg. Memory Latency78.2 Pts80.7 Pts+3%
1-CoreAvg. Single Core Mixed Speed124 PtsHugely faster single-core speed.+80% 68.8 Pts
2-CoreAvg. Dual Core Mixed Speed243 PtsHugely faster dual-core speed.+87% 130 Pts
4-CoreAvg. Quad Core Mixed Speed464 PtsHugely faster quad-core speed.+101% 231 Pts
8-CoreAvg. Octa Core Mixed Speed807 PtsHugely faster octa-core speed.+160% 310 Pts

MemoryOC Memory Latency88.3 Pts90.4 Pts+2%
1-CoreOC Single Core Mixed Speed130 PtsMuch faster OC single-core speed.+67% 77.7 Pts
2-CoreOC Dual Core Mixed Speed259 PtsMuch faster OC dual-core speed.+73% 150 Pts
4-CoreOC Quad Core Mixed Speed512 PtsHugely faster OC quad-core speed.+90% 270 Pts
8-CoreOC Octa Core Mixed Speed874 PtsHugely faster OC octa-core speed.+135% 372 Pts

Market ShareMarket Share (trailing 30 days)3.58 %Hugely higher market share.+953% 0.34 %
ValueValue For Money81.4 %83.5 %+3%
User RatingUBM User Rating92 %Much more popular.+64% 56 %
PricePrice (score)$290$90Much cheaper.+69%

AgeNewest29 MonthsMuch more recent.+74% 110 Months
TDPThermal Design Power (TDP)65 WattsMuch more energy efficient.+32% 95 Watts Processing Cores6 cores6 cores Processing Threads12 threadsHugely higher thread count.+100% 6 threads
LithographyManufacturing process7 nmMuch newer manufacturing.+78% 32 nm
Base ClockBase Clock Speed3.6 GHz+3% 3.5 GHz
Turbo ClockTurbo Clock Speed4.2 GHz+2% 4.1 GHz
64-CoreOC Multi Core Mixed Speed1168 PtsHugely faster OC 64-core speed.+215% 371 Pts
64-CoreAvg. Multi Core Mixed Speed1074 PtsHugely faster 64-core speed.+242% 314 Pts ArchitectureZen2Piledriver
SocketMotherboard SocketAM4AM3+
GraphicsIntegrated GraphicsNoneNone

See more: World Tournament Reception :: Dragon Ball Xenoverse 2 World Tournament ?

AMD’s Ryzen 5 3600 is a 6-core, 12-threaded processor which succeeds the Ryzen 5 2600 improving upon it by 13% in terms of overclocked performance. The 3600 is in competition with Intel’s 6-core i5-9600K. AMD continues to push the multi-core performance envelope: benchmarks show that the 3600 has a 27% overclocked 64-core lead over the 9600K but that the i5-9600K leads by 14% on single to hex core workloads which translates to 10% higher EFps in most of the today’s top games (e.g. PUBG, GTAV and CSGO). Additionally, the 3600"s memory controller, although significantly improved over previous Ryzen iterations, still has limited bandwidth and high latency which adversely impacts gaming. Weaknesses in memory architecture are not readily picked up by benchmarks but they are apparent whilst gaming. Cheaper hyakkendana-hashigozake.coms such as the 9400F deliver better gaming performance in nearly all of today’s popular games. At $190 USD, the 3600 offers good value for purely workstation tasks such as film production but streamers should look elsewhere. Streaming with dedicated hardware such as NVENC or a separate stream PC will nearly always result in fewer dropped frames. The masterfully hyped Ryzen 3600 may well be the best for multimedia producers on a tight budget but in today"s market there are faster and less expensive alternatives for gamers, streamers and general desktop users. 


The FX 6-Core, like most hyakkendana-hashigozake.coms from AMD, delivers reasonably good server orientated multi threaded performance and consequently good processing thoughput at a reasonable price tag. Where the FX 6-Core lacks is in the area of single core performance which although not normally a major problem for server workloads, is always very relevant to desktop users. The overall performance of the FX 6-Core is comparable to Intel"s five years younger Core i7-950. There are server orientated use cases where the FX 6-Core will excel thanks to its excellent overall throughput and in those instances the FX 6-Core represents good value for money. But typical desktop users will find far better value elsewhere.