Advance micro device FD4300WMHKBOX AMD FX Series Quad-Core FX-4300 3.8GHz Desktop, Black Edition Processor

If you want to save money and don't want to build a Hackintosh (PC running Mac software), then you really only have a couple concerns in getting AMD over Intel. First- cost. You're saving at least $100-$150 by getting this CPU over the intel i5 of roughly the number of cores. (Four real cores although in benchmarks the i5 is faster by about 50%). (More on cost below). Also, for about $15 more, you can get the SIX core AMD making the value even better for cost conscious gamers. Usually the graphics card will play a higher role in that realm. Second- power and heat. By going with AMD, your system will use more power and the AMD CPUs really do run hotter. If you want to overclock, you really need to get an aftermarket CPU cooler, or go with a corsair or cooler master liquid cooler. You can get one of those for just $50, but figure that into the cost, and you are not saving as much. (Unless you were going to buy it already). Third- compatibility and speed. If you're worried about what will run and won't, there really isn't anything that won't run on this chip vs. the intel chip. However, if you search review sites, you will find that when running comparable games and things like Photoshop, the AMD tends to lag behind. Now, this might only be less than 10%, but in some cases it's as much as 50% and on some things that's noticeable. However, for the majority of applications and uses, the average user won't notice that difference. (We're talking the average user, not the gamer or someone editing large videos). Fourth- overclocking. You can overclock this CPU, and to do that on intel you have to get at least the i5 K series, which currently is $234. A sizeable difference. However, keep the heat issue I mentioned above in mind. Bottom line- if you want to save money, this CPU will run nicely if you're already getting basically the same configuration as an intel i5 setup. If you don't mind the extra power (maybe a few dollars a year in electricity in truth) and the extra heat, it will run everything you need very smoothly for the average user. It will allow you to play games, but the money saved on intel should probably be put into a better graphics card in that instance.

This is a very nice budget processor. If you can get this for $90 or less. If not go for the fx 6300, it has 2 extra cores and is usually around $110. I have the fx6300 and it is a great processor for my gaming rig. I bought the fx4300 for my htpc build. I had an extra AM3+ mother board and wanted to us it. This is actually a very nice processor with very good performance. No it cannot compete with intel i5 or i7 but it is not meant to do so. It does however offer an alternative to i3s and pentiums that are around the same price. If you look at some official performance reviews it is about on par with an I3 3220. It may not have as high of IPC (instructions per clock) but it is not far behind, however it is a little better at multi tasking as it has 4 cores instead of two with hyper threading. The downside is it uses more power than its intel alternatives and runs a little hotter. But it is typically cheaper than the Intel it competes with. As far as gaming, i had an old HD7770 that i thew in (soon to be a GTX 750ti) and it handles modern titles pretty well. For fun i threw my R9270 in just to see how it compares to my fx6300 overclocked to 4.2 ghz. The 4300 did very well. It handles battlefield 4 nicely and was only about 5-10 fps slower. It that was pretty typical of all the games have. For older games there was almost no difference between the two processors. In all this is a good budget processor but it needs to be priced right for that to be true. If it stays at $90 or lower it is a good deal. Any higher and the fx6300 or the intel i3s are a better alternative.

I've been using AMD cpu's for my last several builds with good luck. I'm just an amateur and all the computers are for home use, mostly supporting language teaching and equity/bond trading. This build went together without a hitch, just lucky. Most of the parts were sourced from Amazon, a few elsewhere at a better price. Something maybe not often considered is tax when purchasing. At least for me, Amazon folds in sales tax which can be substantial for a large purchase. Many other sites do not do that, so I figure it into the pricing when deciding on an order. Everything performed as expected. One of the nice results was installing the cpu. In the past it always seemed to require too much force to seat the cpu into the mobo. In this case it just slid right into place, which was a relief. I never try to overclock or anything fancy. The only changes to the bios were to get the ssd and the sata/IDE drives right. One problem with an older build was coming out of hibernation. This system has no problem. My other always goes to blue screen, which from my reading is not an uncommon problem for Windows. Used Windows 7 Ultimate for the foreign language processing. Stayed away from Windows 8, just seemed prudent based on my reading. One disappointment was the arrival of the 26in Hannspree monitor. The main box had a huge gash in it and all the items inside were banging around loosely. A real low quality job of packing. Fortunately, I think Hannspree assumed their monitor would be shipped by gorillas, so did a good job of packing. It worked out of the box, but I deducted one star for the horrible shipping. It's tough and Amazon probably had little control over the gash, but the terrible packing is on Amazon. My other source did not have this problem. I just used the video and audio from the mobo which is good enough, speakers a simple 2.1 system. Temperatures look like 7deg C for the cpu at idle, 35deg C for the South bridge, and around 30 deg C for the ssd and sata drives. The system is quiet as a mouse, especially when the hard drives sleep and I work off the ssd. Cooling is just whatever came with the system. The SSD has about 60 GB free after loading in the OS and all my programming. Not much else to add. Below is the build in case anyone is interested: mobo - Gigabyte GA-78LMT-USB3 cpu - AMDFX-4300 memory - Team elite 8GB(2x4GB) DDR3 SSD - Samsung 840 120 GB monitor - Hanns-G 26in power - Corsair CX 430 case - APEX PC-389-C dvd - ASUS model DRW-24B1ST sata mouse - Logitech B100-TAA scanner - Canon LiDE 110 speakers - Creative A250 OS - W7 Ultimate some extra sata cables,Artic silver paste,DVI-D cable.

I'm sure it does what it says. AMD is pretty good about that. My rating is only 3 because the compatibility seems to be a bit in flux. Double check your motherboard and the AMD website before buying — the compatibility can apparently change when they see fit. The box was nice though.

I only recently got into PC building, and so I can't offer much in detail on how useful this particular chip is, but from my experience it does quite well. I paired this chip up with 8gb of DDR3 ram (Dual channeled) and an EVGA GT 730; all running at base specs with no overclocking, so take this review with a grain of salt. The chip seems to work very well, I'm able to run Fallout 4 above 30 fps with decent graphics (I'm no snob, so I don't venture beyond minimal settings, but I think this chip could handle better) which is really nice to see in a pretty old chip like this. But, of course, Fallout 4 is a triple A title designed to be functional. So I tested this chip against something that even the highest powered machines have trouble with: Games running on Adobe Flash. Considering I've clocked in plenty of hours on Kongregate after installing this chip, I believe I can safely say that this manages even those perplexingly taxing games quite well, with minimal slowdowns and obviously quality. As such, I'll say that this chip is quite good for the average PC builder looking to get a functional and fun gaming experience.

I've had this CPU for over a year now with an AMD Radeon 6670, and am now upgrading to an FX-8350 8 core CPU, so I felt obligated to review this. My new CPU should be coming tomorrow. I recently upgraded my GPU to a GTX 750 Ti, alongside with 16 GBs of RAM, and with this CPU, it all works very well with this GPU. I get a stable 60 FPS in a lot of games. When I bought this CPU, i new I wasn't buying a super good CPU. I knew that this CPU was for a mid range computer build, and that's what I intended on building my computer as. If you buy this CPU, don't expect to play very many current gen games, however, the vast majority of games from last gen should perform optimally; considering you have a decent graphics card. Now, what are my complaint about this CPU? I'm not sure, too be honest. It really didn't undermine any of my expectations as far as game performance; it performed as well as I had expected it to.

This new and current Series of AMD processors is based on the Bulldozer architecture; however, this time AMD fixed most if not all of the previous problems that people ran into with the first bulldozer generation. The performance is outstanding when comparing with Intel i5 processor. You can run games with better resolution and without the risk of crushing. The price is worthy and you have a great manufacturing warranty, so you have nothing to risk but pure satisfaction. You will find that Graphic software will run great for you too e.g. Solid Works, ProE, Autocad. I currently have two computers, one Intel and the other is AMD. I bought the FX-4300 4-Core (3.8 GHz) to replace my AMD Phenom II (3.3 GHz). Both computers run with a ASUS motherboard, but to compare both systems I used the same NVidia GTX-570 graphic card. I Immediately saw the difference when running my pc games "BF3 and Medal of honor Warfighter" Both games automatically recognize your computer capabilities and set graphics according to it. Now with my new AMD FX-4300 both of my games run with better graphic resolution and without sacrificing game performance. When comparing with my Intel i5 computer I had to lower the graphics resolution in order to run then without lag, for Medal of Honor Warfighter the i5 would sometimes even crash. The difference is obvious for my i5 (3.4GHz) Vs my FX-4300 (3.8 GHz), the winning AMD processor will run way faster for you and with better graphic resolution at a better price.

I have been an AMD fan for years. I used this processor in a recent build for a friend of mine in a lower cost system. On the very first boot it gave me a CPU fan error. I quickly pulled the cover of the case to find the fan hooked up correctly but not spinning. I gave it a quick spin to make sure nothing was blocking its motion. It started to work and hasnt stopped yet. This made me happy but I am not feeling good about how long it will last. I had rather AMD not provide a heatsink and fan over shipping the cheapest thing they can get their hands on. I understand cost control but on something this important? Come on AMD... Otherwise, this process is super fast and the temps are better than expected. I hope to get years of use out of this baby if the fan keep working.