What To Know
- However, the 3200G has a larger cache size of 6 MB compared to the 4 MB cache of the FX 6350.
- This makes the 3200G a more versatile option for users who want to build a low-cost gaming PC without the need for a dedicated graphics card.
- The FX 6350 is still a viable option for budget-conscious builders who do not require integrated graphics or are planning to use a dedicated graphics card.
The AMD FX 6350 and Ryzen 3 3200G are two budget-friendly processors that have been popular choices for gamers and budget-conscious builders alike. In this comprehensive comparison, we will delve into the key differences between these two processors to help you make an informed decision about which one is the best fit for your needs.
Architecture and Cores:
The AMD FX 6350 is based on the older Bulldozer architecture, featuring six cores and six threads. On the other hand, the Ryzen 3 3200G is built on the more modern Zen+ architecture, offering four cores and eight threads.
Clock Speed and Cache:
The FX 6350 operates at a base clock speed of 3.9 GHz, which can be boosted up to 4.2 GHz with Turbo Core. The Ryzen 3 3200G has a lower base clock speed of 3.6 GHz but can boost up to 4.0 GHz. However, the 3200G has a larger cache size of 6 MB compared to the 4 MB cache of the FX 6350.
Integrated Graphics:
A key difference between these two processors is the integrated graphics. The FX 6350 does not have any integrated graphics, while the Ryzen 3 3200G features the Radeon Vega 8 GPU with 512 stream processors. This makes the 3200G a more versatile option for users who want to build a low-cost gaming PC without the need for a dedicated graphics card.
Gaming Performance:
In terms of gaming performance, the Ryzen 3 3200G generally outperforms the FX 6350. The Zen+ architecture and higher clock speeds provide a noticeable advantage in most games, especially in titles that can utilize multiple threads. However, the FX 6350 can still hold its own in less demanding games or when paired with a dedicated graphics card.
Power Consumption and Thermal Performance:
The FX 6350 has a higher TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 125W compared to the 3200G’s TDP of 65W. This means that the FX 6350 requires a more robust cooling solution and will consume more power.
Overclocking Potential:
Both the FX 6350 and Ryzen 3 3200G have some overclocking potential. However, the 3200G is generally considered to have better overclocking capabilities due to its more efficient architecture and lower TDP.
Summary:
The AMD Ryzen 3 3200G is the clear winner over the AMD FX 6350 for most users. It offers better gaming performance, integrated graphics, lower power consumption, and a more modern architecture. The FX 6350 is still a viable option for budget-conscious builders who do not require integrated graphics or are planning to use a dedicated graphics card.
Answers to Your Questions
Q: Which processor is better for gaming, the FX 6350 or Ryzen 3 3200G?
A: The Ryzen 3 3200G generally outperforms the FX 6350 in gaming, especially in titles that can utilize multiple threads.
Q: Does the FX 6350 have integrated graphics?
A: No, the FX 6350 does not have integrated graphics.
Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?
A: The Ryzen 3 3200G has a lower TDP of 65W compared to the FX 6350’s TDP of 125W.
Q: Can the FX 6350 be overclocked?
A: Yes, the FX 6350 has some overclocking potential, but the Ryzen 3 3200G generally has better overclocking capabilities.
Q: Which processor is better for a budget gaming build?
A: The Ryzen 3 3200G is a better option for budget gaming builds due to its integrated graphics and better gaming performance.
