AMD FX 4-Core FX-4300 BOX (FD4300WMHKBOX)
 | Outdated Product Socket: AMD AM3+; Cores (cores): 4; Threads (threads): 4; Speed (GHz): 3.8; |
 |
AMD FX 4-Core FX-4300 BOX | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The information in the model description is for reference purposes.
Always clarify the specifications and configuration of the product with the online store manager before purchasing.
Catalog AMD 2026 - new arrivals, bestsellers, and the most relevant models AMD.
Always clarify the specifications and configuration of the product with the online store manager before purchasing.
Catalog AMD 2026 - new arrivals, bestsellers, and the most relevant models AMD.
Classification of Current AMD ProcessorsWe're breaking down the success story of the Ryzen lineup and what's worth considering for purchase in 2026.
How to choose a CPU?How to choose the right CPU for any task, from spreadsheets to modern games and work applications
AccessoriesAll accessories for AMD FX-4300 BOX →
Model overview based on user reviews
The AMD FX 4-Core processor is praised for its affordable price and decent performance, making it a popular choice for budget-conscious users. It features new technologies and instructions, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and operates at a good frequency. Users appreciate its independent core operation and low operating temperature, although some note the need for a better cooler due to noise and inefficiency. While it may not match the latest Intel processors in raw power, it offers a solid performance for its price, especially in gaming and multitasking. The processor is seen as a good foundation for future upgrades, though it lacks support for newer technologies like DDR4 and PCI-Express 3.0. Overall, it is recommended for those building a budget gaming PC or looking for a cost-effective upgrade.
Pros
Cons
0 2 5 15 |
A good processor that will last for the next 3-5 years. It's recommended to disable the turbo boost mode in BIOS and overclock the processor to 3.9GHz using the unlocked multiplier, or even more, but it's not advisable (it doesn't hold over 4GHz on every board). According to many tests, it overclocks well to 4.5GHz on 9th series chipsets. Graphics cards like the 6850 and above are a great fit. It's used in assembling high-end (quite expensive!) systems, which speaks to its considerable (currently) promise. Advantages: New technology (modular, 3 modules with 2 processors per module)_32 nm manufacturing technology. New (additional) instructions and commands. Declared (standard) heat dissipation of 95 Watts (significantly higher when overclocked, up to 152 Watts!). Total cache (L2+L3) 14MB; recommended for motherboards with 990FX chipsets. Disadvantages: Weak and too noisy (boxed) cooler (3500 RPM) Absence of software or drivers fully unlocking this type of processor (unfinished technology so far, resulting in the processor noticeably losing to previous versions in single-threaded tests, however, in multi-threaded tests, it is advantageous. On many boards (released before 03.2012) a new BIOS will be required!!!  Vladislav_1978888: use AMD FX 4-Core month or more |
I would like to refute the previous user — the revolution has indeed happened: with 4 boilers, considering the new tech process, with such cache volume and THAT PRICE (keep in mind, the model was released recently) — AMD not only caught up but surpassed Intel!!! I don’t argue, the Core i7 might be more productive (but not critically), but excuse me, each of its cores is dual-thread: 4 cores with 2 threads = 8 threads, and it costs half a thousand more... For what half a thousand, for 10-15% performance? And another fact, which is not primarily about affordability — 2 out of the 5 most powerful supercomputers in the world run on AMD processors (Opteron), 1 — on Radeon HD 3870 graphics cards, and 2 — on Cell processors (no, it's not short for Celeron). Think, comrades, before reasoning: whether you are paying for a hyped brand or for power. Very low operating temperature: with 4 boilers and a low load, it doesn't rise above room temperature! Very low price for the initial stage (keep in mind that it will drop even further over the year)! Impressive features for a mid-range budget processor. New tech process. High performance. Neither I nor anyone else from the dozens of people whose comments I had to read on various websites found it. MaTeRyY: use AMD FX 4-Core week i recommend it should buy |
After the dual-core (Intel E8500 3,160 MHz), performance is noticeably higher both in games and other applications, but it's not really visible during normal document work. It's not that easy to load the FX-6100 processor with any tasks (unless they're complex tests and encoding). I'm satisfied with the purchase, as I aimed for a fairly reasonable upgrade (with a new motherboard, processor, memory, 600W "CHIEFTEC" power supply, HD7770 graphics card) up to 3500 UAH, which is definitely quite feasible with AMD. I'm not going to claim that this processor is cooler than the latest Intels (judging by the tests, it's not), but it certainly matches its stated price. By the way, I barely sold my old proc. (E8500), with the motherboard, 4GB DDR2-800 MHz memory, GTX260 graphics card, 500W (Chinese) power supply, for 1070 UAH (sold the graphics card for the most, 600 UAH), and I paid more than 800 dollars for all this back in 2008! I say this to point out that even if you invest 2000 dollars in a system, within two to three years it depreciates drastically (plus, finding someone to take it off your hands isn't that easy anymore; many chase after new and cheap ones). So, an upgrade based on Intel would indeed be the most expensive (the processor and motherboard, in addition to the graphics card and probably, most likely, memory, would cost significant amounts of money for our citizens, and it would likely barely fit into 800 dollars, naturally depending on the components). New technologies and instructions, good frequency and quite high performance, unlocked multiplier (for convenient and stable small overclocking, at 20%-25%), full six cores (three modules, one module can be disabled to save energy, as two 4-core modules are sufficient for most tasks). Replace the cooler, it's noisy and inefficient (especially even with slight overclocking)! Unoptimized (possibly for now) software (for the most part) for the new type of processors. Oleg: use AMD FX 4-Core month or more |
3 out of 22 user review(s) shown
10 more user review(s)
Video reviews
AMD's "Future-Proof" FX-8370 in 2020 (CPU Benchmarks, Overclocking, & Revisit)
4 August 2020423 751 view
AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution Quality Comparison & Benchmarks (FSR)
22 June 2021404 772 view
AMD Radeon Super Resolution vs. FidelityFX Usability & Image Quality Comparison
20 March 2022345 844 view
AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 - FSR 2.0 vs Native vs DLSS - The DF Tech Review
13 May 2022269 217 view
The CPU That Almost Killed AMD: Bulldozer FX-8150 Benchmarks in 2020
21 August 2020175 029 view
AMDs Weakest FX Processor...
4 November 2024136 924 view
RETRO UNBOXING AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 Sledgehammer Processor Unboxing & First Look Linus Tech Tips
9 March 2010134 093 view
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Six Core AM3 Processor Unboxing & First Look Linus Tech Tips
28 April 2010127 044 view
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Six Core Processor Unboxing & First Look Linus Tech Tips
14 December 2010126 851 view
WHY Are People Still Buying These CPUs? - AMD FX Series in 2023
13 March 202382 809 view
Is The 6-Core AMD FX 6350 Suitable For a Budget Gaming PC In 2021?
23 March 202181 415 view
AMD FX 120mm Liquid Cooling Unit Unboxing & First Look Linus Tech Tips
4 April 201271 512 view
Building a PC with AMD's FX 8350 in 2023... Can It Still Game?
30 April 202364 967 view
AMD FX CPU’s in 2022...How Bad Is It?
17 May 202261 701 view
GPU Scaling, AMD FX 8370 vs. Ryzen 3, 5 & 7
6 August 202058 729 view
Can You Still Game with the AMD FX 6100?
14 December 202357 296 view
Unboxing Boxes #56: Celebrates Zen 2 by Putting a Dart in AMD's FX Processor!
4 April 201939 339 view
i3-7100 vs FX-8350 - AMD FX Benchmarks Are Definitely Flawed
1 July 202138 940 view
FX 6350 w/ The Wraith Cooler Review - A Very Nice Package (vs Athlon 860K & 845) | OzTalksHW
7 July 201618 508 view
AMD FX-8320 Unboxing, Spec-Detail and Stock HSF Comparison to Intel, Binning
20 January 20143 845 view
AMD FX VS Ryzen in APEX, PUBG, Fortnite & BFV
6 May 20192 716 view
People's Processor
10 years ago, the FX chip line was AMD's biggest hit. Since then, AMD has released several not-so-successful models and has continued to keep the FX alive. But when the company announced the entry-level Ryzen series a couple of years ago, it seemed like there was no place for old people here anymore. But AMD did the wiser thing by updating the FX chips and sending them to the low-cost segment.
One of the most attractive options in terms of price and quality ratio among the entire FX family is the FX-4300, which for 3-4 years received the title of "people's" processor. Today it is positioned as a workhorse, but don't be fooled, because it has the legs of a thoroughbred horse: performant even by today's standards, 4 cores with a clock speed of 3.8 GHz are automatically overclocked to 4 GHz, and 4 MB of L3 cache was the norm yesterday for CPU of the average price segment. Plus, the FX-4300 has an unlocked multiplier, making it much easier to overclock.
The foundation for a performant home PC
Perhaps the only minus of the processor is the vague prospects for updating. Although AMD encourages manufacturers to keep the AM3 socket in mind, everyone is looking towards the newer AM4, and there are not as many motherboards supporting the previous platform as they were a couple of years ago. Therefore, here and now, the FX-4300 is primarily good as the basis of a solid home / office computer, which is not required to perform resource-intensive tasks like video rendering or run demanding games.
And don't forget the games
However, all of the above does not mean that games are his kryptonite. In past generation hits like Batman: Arkham City, Battlefield 4 and Resident Evil 5, the FX-4300 paired with a GTX 980-caliber graphics card delivers a stable 90-100 fps at high settings. Considering that most people don't see much of a difference in the graphics between Battlefield 4 and Battlefield 1, this is a great result. With very recent games, everything is more difficult, since a lot depends on optimization in them. For example, if "Far Cry 5" at medium settings will work pretty fast, then "Project CARS 2" will noticeably slow down.
We recommend
AMD AM4, 65 W, cores 6 , threads 12 threads, process technology 7 nm, 3.6 GHz, TurboBoost 4.1 GHz, DDR4 3200 MHz
AMD WRX8, 280 W, cores 16 - 64 , threads 32 - 128 threads, process technology 7 nm, 2.7 - 4 GHz, TurboBoost 4.5 GHz, DDR4 3200 MHz
AMD AM4, 65 W, cores 8 , threads 16 threads, process technology 7 nm, 3.7 / 3.8 GHz, TurboBoost 4.6 GHz, DDR4 3200 MHz, - / Radeon Vega 8
Intel LGA 1151 v2, 35 - 95 W, cores 6 , threads 6 threads, process technology 14 nm, 2.2 - 3.7 GHz, TurboBoost 3.7 - 4.6 GHz, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 2666 MHz, - / UHD Graphics 630
Intel LGA 1151 v2, 65 / 95 W, cores 8 , threads 8 threads, process technology 14 nm, 3 / 3.6 GHz, TurboBoost 4.7 / 4.9 GHz, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 2666 MHz, UHD Graphics 630
AMD AM4, 65 W, cores 6 , threads 12 threads, process technology 7 nm, 3.6 / 3.9 GHz, TurboBoost 4.2 - 4.6 GHz, maximum - / 128 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz
Intel LGA 1700, 65 / 125 W, cores 10 / 14 , 6P+4E, 6P+8E, threads 16 / 20 threads, process technology 10 nm, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz, DDR5 4800 / 5600 MHz
AMD AM5, 65 - 120 W, cores 8 , threads 16 threads, process technology 5 nm, 3.8 - 4.5 GHz, TurboBoost 5 - 5.4 GHz, maximum 128 GB, DDR5 5200 MHz, Radeon
Intel LGA 1700, 65 - 150 W, cores 24 , 8P+16E, threads 32 threads, process technology 10 nm, TurboBoost 5.6 - 6 GHz, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz, DDR5 5600 MHz, - / UHD Graphics 770
Intel LGA 1700, 65 / 125 W, cores 16 , 8P+8E, threads 24 threads, process technology 10 nm, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz, DDR5 5600 MHz, - / UHD Graphics 770
Intel LGA 1700, 65 / 125 W, cores 10 / 14 , 6P+4E, 6P+8E, threads 16 / 20 threads, process technology 10 nm, maximum 192 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz, DDR5 4800 / 5600 MHz
Intel LGA 1700, 60 W, cores 4 , threads 8 threads, process technology 10 nm, maximum 128 GB, DDR4 3200 MHz, DDR5 4800 MHz, - / UHD Graphics 730