Xeon E3-1125C vs FX-6300
Primary details
Comparing FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1698 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 55 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.56 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 2.60 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Gladden (2012) |
| Release date | 23 October 2012 (11 years ago) | 14 May 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $132 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 288 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6144 KB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB | 8192 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 216 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 1,160 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.15 V - Max: 1.3875 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3+ | Intel BGA1283 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 40 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 23 October 2012 | 14 May 2012 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 4 |
| Threads | 6 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 40 Watt |
FX-6300 has an age advantage of 5 months, and 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Xeon E3-1125C, on the other hand, has 137.5% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that FX-6300 is a desktop processor while Xeon E3-1125C is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-6300 and Xeon E3-1125C, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
