AMD FX 3.5 Ghz 95-Watt AM3+ Processor FD6300WMHKBOX

I took a few months deciding if I was going to go AMD or Intel. Due to cost, I decided to go AMD, but which one? After weeks and weeks of research, reading specs, watching YouTube reviews, etc, I landed on the AMD FX-6300. Let me just say I'm really glad I saved the money!First of all, you have to realize I purchased this CPU for a gaming machine. I didn't buy it for engineering applications (CAD, MATLAB, etc). I bought this CPU for gaming and web development, and it has performed flawlessly for both. In fact, my frame rates (FPS) have been at or above 60 in most cases on high and ultra settings in 1080p. I run Starcraft II at over 60 FPS, WildStar on high settings at over 60 FPS, Battlefield 4 on custom high/ultra settings at 60 FPS, and the list could go on and on.I'm running an EVGA GTX 950 GPU. I can honestly say, other than taking a little longer to load the environment in some games (especially Battlefield 4), most of the FPS dips have been due to the GPU, not the CPU. The GTX 950 is not a high end graphics card. I put together a budget gaming rig and it does everything I want it to do, and it does it well. However, I think this CPU would shine if you threw in a GTX-970 or better yet even one of the new GTX 10xx series. Some scoff at the idea of having such an inexpensive CPU in the same rig with a high end graphics card, but for gaming it works just fine.Also, if you're wondering whether to purchase the FX-6300 vs the FX-83xx, my opinion is save the money and go with the FX-6300. If you look at the benchmarks performed by several different people out on the Internet, you'll see there isn't even a noticeable difference between the FX-6300 and the FX-83xx CPU (less than 5% in many cases for gaming applications).One last thing: I have a dual boot Windows 10/Linux Mint 17.3 system and this CPU works great with Linux Mint and even handles gaming on Linux like a champ. I've run some games native to Linux and some via Wine (or PlayLinux) and it works beautifully, rendering 60 FPS and higher.So, if all you need is a gaming/media rig, don't buy into the hype that more money for a CPU means a better experience. Sure, more powerful CPUs might give you higher frame rates. But when you pair the FX-6300 with a great GPU, you'll get awesome frame rates (I'm happy pairing it with just an average GPU). The cost/benefit ratio for this processor is amazing. I'm happy I saved the money and I think you will be too.

The AMD FX-6300 is an excellent CPU. Being a six core, it already has an advantage over the more standard quad-core options. However, it should be noted that you most likely won't be using all six cores if you're just gaming. That set aside, the processor also runs at a very fast 3.5 GHz, which is already above average. Combine this with the processor's flexible overclocking abilities (getting it to run at 4 GHz, 4.3 GHz, 4.5GHz and 4.7 GHz are common, and I've seen many users get those speeds. Make sure you get an aftermarket cooler though!), and you have a CPU that can do miracles. The CPU's manual also demonstrates exactly how to install the CPU and makes it a super easy, low-stress operation!I've been playing some games myself, with a a Sapphire Radeon 7770 (not the best card, so my results can easily be surpassed!), and have been comfortably around 60 FPS in games such as Far Cry 3 at medium settings at my CPU's stock speed. Other, less demanding games such as Oblivion, Skyrim, Mirror's Edge and Blacklight Retribution all run easily above 60 FPS, and games such as Minecraft surpass 100 FPS with no problem.There are however, a few nitpicks I'd like to talk about. The first, and most obvious, is that the FX-6300 gets hot. With the stock cooler, games like Far Cry 3 bump my temperature to 60 degrees Celsius. However, the stock cooler does a good job at maintaining the temperature here. It should be noted, also, that 60 Celsius is an alright temperature for an FX-6300 under load. Another thing I want to nitpick on is the stock cooler, which looks and feels very cheap and fragile. It's also very small and doesn't even cover the entirety of the heatsink. One last thing about the stock cooler is that it uses AMD's clip-on mechanism to lock onto the motherboard, and this can be a nuisance if one wants to upgrade to an aftermarket cooler because you will have to unscrew the mounting piece on the motherboard and then install your aftermarket cooler. This process can be daunting and at the very least, very annoying. The process of attaching the heatsink with the AMD system is pretty daunting itself, since you have to apply quite a bit of force to get it on, and I myself was frightened by the amount of torque I was producing, and it can also be difficult due to lack of good explanation and picture detail in the CPU's manual. There also seems to be an odd problem with the CPU's temperature sensors! I recommend using Speed Fan for your temp measurements, because programs like CoreTemp and HWMonitor give incorrect temperatures for your CPU when it is under low-load or none. For me, it will give me temperatures half of my room temperature! I'm not sure which program is accurate with temperatures under load however, as they both report different temperatures with variations of about 10 C, but I still tend to use Speed Fan since it gives higher temperature readings for both and its better to be safe than sorry! And finally, one last nitpick is that the processor seems to have problems with Windows 7's power options, but it is not a big issue as it usually resolves itself in a few moments.Overall, if you combine this processor with a good graphics card, you should be getting results far superior to mine in the gaming scene. When it comes to video and graphics editing, this processor will accomplish anything you throw at it, and for every day use, you will not be disappointed. While it is not a perfect product, it is very good, and that is why it is a solid 9/10.