Fx-6300 vs I5-6400

[Planewings]

So I'm thinking about buying a new PC and have seen some decent rigs in my price bracket and it comes down to these two processors(I'm upgrading the Gpu later so that doesn't really matter) I have seen alot of different sites comparing the two saying that the i5 is better but the fx has more GHZ I was wondering if someone could clarify why the i5 is better.

[_I_]

no contest i5
it has fewer cores and lower ghz
but its 4 years newer
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/357/AMD_FX-Series_FX-6300_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-6400.html

Technology (micron) fx = 0.032 i5 =0.014
the i5 transistors are under half the distance of fx, translates to over double the performacne per clock

[Planewings]

Thanks for the info this is the first PC I'm really looking into before I but it so I appreciate the help

[John Doe]

Originalmente postado por _I_:

Technology (micron) fx = 0.032 i5 =0.014
the i5 transistors are under half the distance of fx, translates to over double the performacne per clock

This is nonsensical, the manufacturing process has little to nothing to do with performance.

Let me give you an example, both the Raspberry Pi and the GTX 580 are designed with an about 40nm process... however, the GTX 580 has a ton of more graphics processing power than the Raspberry Pi.

[_I_]

the pi runs at 1ghz and 1 core and slow ram
gtx 580 has 500+ cores and extremely fast ram

you cant compare gpu and cpu specs

[John Doe]

The GTX 580 doesn't have over 500 cores, it only has one core and it's called the GTX 580... or whatever the codename of its GPU is. It has over 500 shaders however.

Besides, what does that have anything to do with how small or how big the manufactoring process is? The only thing that decides on is pretty much the temps of the component. You're really making no sense on this one.

The Raspberry Pi is a GPU + CPU in one chip also.

[SundownKid]

i5 is better because much better per-core performance.

Watch out if you are getting a prebuilt to plug in a GPU, make sure it doesnt have a proprietary PSU, or if it does, that the PSU is strong enough..

[_I_]

Originalmente postado por John Doe:

The GTX 580 doesn't have over 500 cores, it only has one core and it's called the GTX 580... or whatever the codename of its GPU is. It has over 500 shaders however.

Besides, what does that have anything to do with how small or how big the manufactoring process is? The only thing that decides on is pretty much the temps of the component. You're really making no sense on this one.

its cpu has 512 cores (each shader is a core)
http://www.hwcompare.com/9131/geforce-gtx-580/
Unified Shaders 512
Core Speed 772 MHz
Bus Type GDDR5
Bus Width 384-bit

thast over 500x faster than a raspberry pi

and the pi is a 32bit cpu vs 384bit gtx580

[John Doe]

The GTX 580 processor doesn't have 512 cores, it has 512 SHADERs, read the thing you just posted yourself (nobody refers to shaders as cores, period.).

Having 500x more shaders doesn't make it over 500x faster, performance doesn't go right in line with the amount of shaders. There are more things to consider such as the architecture.

Really, where do you think you're heading?

[_I_]

the op isnt comparing a pi to the gtx card
hes wants to know whats better fx or i5, answer is i5

[John Doe]

It is, however that has almost nothing to do with it being built on a smaller process.

Being built on a smaller process doesn't make something over 2x faster.

Look at SSDs, do you see an X SSD that comes with 25nm flash functioning at 1000 mb/s than Y SSD with 12nm flash that does 2000 mb/s? It doesn't work that way. You're just making things up, twisting and shaping how you see it fit.

[_I_]

mb/s is a speed, not performance
thats limited by its interface not the ram itslf

[John Doe]

Lol, so performance is not speed now? Are you drunk?

No, if you stick those SSDs to PCI-E, and they would be given the speeds I talked about, they would not be limited by interface...

and if you disagree, I can show you more examples, right from CPUs as to why you're wrong.

[pasa]

Originalmente postado por _I_:

no contest i5
it has fewer cores and lower ghz
but its 4 years newer
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/357/AMD_FX-Series_FX-6300_vs_Intel_Core_i5_i5-6400.html

Good link. However the core number compare is incorrect, if you compare the same things. AMD confuses the market by calling "module" what intel calls "core" and "core" thet intel call "thread". Just like i7 has the same 4 cores as i5 but 8 threads, the performance is lightyears form 2x. The Fx similarly has 3 real cores stowing up a 6 but performance-wize it's like 3.5 in most realistic situations. Especially in gaming.

[[☥] - CJ -]

Okay
THE POINT IS
The FX 6300 is old and was never very good to begin with

The i5 is much better, period.

Stop comparing apples to oranges and just state FACTS.
That being the i5 IS BETTER.

[ექსტრემალური ვიდეოnave]

the i5 is almost twice as much lmao. and yeah, it's better.