Tuesday, April 30th 2013

AMD Intros FX-6350 and FX-4350 Desktop Processors to the Retail Channel

AMD introduced two additions to its FX line of socket AM3+ processors, the six-core FX-6350, and the quad-core FX-4350. The two were released as OEM-only parts, late last year, and are now being released to the retail channel, in PIB (processor-in-box) packages. Based on the 32 nm "Vishera" silicon and "Piledriver" micro-architecture, the two chips are designed to hold two extremely catchy sub-$150 price-points.

The FX-6350 features a nominal core clock speed of 3.90 GHz, a maximum Turbo Core frequency of 4.20 GHz, 6 MB of total L2 cache, and 8 MB L3 cache. The FX-4350, on the other hand, features 4.20 GHz clock speed, with 4.30 GHz Turbo Core, 4 MB of total L2 cache, and 8 MB of L3. Both parts feature unlocked base-clock multipliers, modern instruction-sets such as AVX, AES-NI, SSE4.2, SSE4.1, FMA2, and XOP. Both further have TDP rated at 125W. The FX-6350 retail PIB package will be priced as low as US $132, while the FX-4350 will go for as low as $122. The two will also ship with AMD's newest case-badge design, pictured below.
Add your own comment

24 Comments on AMD Intros FX-6350 and FX-4350 Desktop Processors to the Retail Channel

#1
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Many Thanks to Ikaruga for the tip.
Posted on Reply
#2
Cheeseball
The new case badge is refreshing to say the least.
Posted on Reply
#3
Ravenas
I can't wait until they can't fit some major GPU power in these things.
Posted on Reply
#4
Rahmat Sofyan
I hope the performance from fx6350 not to far away from i5 25K :)...

I'll buy it, if at least equal with x6 1090T or better.
Posted on Reply
#5
ironwolf
Newegg "only" +$7 on each vs. the listed prices above, not too "bad."
Posted on Reply
#7
blibba
"Both further have TDP rated at 125W"

Bulldozer and Vishera continue to remind me of when Intel was struggling to compete with the inefficient, high-clocked P4 against AMD's more efficient, low-clocked Athlon 64.

by: Dent1
if you exclude gaming.
Unfortunately for AMD, most people rarely if ever use their computer for anything that really taxes the CPU, besides gaming.
Posted on Reply
#8
buildzoid
I really like the specs for the FX4350 4.2Ghz base clock and 8MB L3 this should beat the 8350 in games. And if the base clocks are that high I wonder where they can clock to. 5Ghz is only 700Mhz from the Turbo clock so that should be easily doable even on air cooling. These should wipe out the i3s in any performance test other than the really badly optimized games.
Posted on Reply
#9
Dent1
by: buildzoid
I really like the specs for the FX4350 4.2Ghz base clock and 8MB L3 this should beat the 8350 in games. And if the base clocks are that high I wonder where they can clock to. 5Ghz is only 700Mhz from the Turbo clock so that should be easily doable even on air cooling. These should wipe out the i3s in any performance test other than the really badly optimized games.
^ The FX 4350 I'm not feeling. The FX 6300 performs as fast as the i3 in games and destroys it in everything else and it's cheaper. For the FX4350 to be worthwile they'd have to price it so cheap AMD would make their APUs look undsireable.

Pretty much all the FX lineup can already reach 5Ghz or near on air too.
Posted on Reply
#10
TheGuruStud
by: blibba
"Both further have TDP rated at 125W"

Bulldozer and Vishera continue to remind me of when Intel was struggling to compete with the inefficient, high-clocked P4 against AMD's more efficient, low-clocked Athlon 64.



Unfortunately for AMD, most people rarely if ever use their computer for anything that really taxes the CPU, besides gaming.
The larger problem is the software. Back then AMD was crushing intel with the same bad software on intel's side. Today, the AMD CPUs are very close in real performance (and potentially must faster) if the software can use the chip and/or if it's not slanted for intel.

There's far more performance in software than there will ever be in hardware. (yeah, I'm a broken record, but worth repeating, and AMD hasn't been trying until recently on the software)
Posted on Reply
#11
blibba
by: buildzoid
I really like the specs for the FX4350 4.2Ghz base clock and 8MB L3 this should beat the 8350 in games. And if the base clocks are that high I wonder where they can clock to. 5Ghz is only 700Mhz from the Turbo clock so that should be easily doable even on air cooling. These should wipe out the i3s in any performance test other than the really badly optimized games.
If past AMD architectures are anything to go by, these won't be significantly higher clocking than any other FX*3**.

For example, the Athlon 6400+ didn't really overclock any higher than the Athlon 5***, and the Phenom II 980 didn't really clock much higher than any other Black Edition Phenom II X4.
Posted on Reply
#12
d1nky
why do they keep bringing out new four cores?! can someone explain the logistics please.

every 4100 user was gutted when they brought out the 4130 or was it 4170 (im losing track lol), which performed better for the near same price.

i think its the same for 6 series.

just give me sex, sorry thats my GF! Give me new steamroller..........
Posted on Reply
#13
Mathragh
Those new logo's look awesome
Posted on Reply
#14
theoneandonlymrk
by: d1nky
why do they keep bringing out new four cores?! can someone explain the logistics please.

every 4100 user was gutted when they brought out the 4130 or was it 4170 (im losing track lol), which performed better for the near same price.

i think its the same for 6 series.

just give me sex, sorry thats my GF! Give me new steamroller..........
Play fair fella , both amd and intel make more then one new spec four core per generation and bin them to split the priceing up, the differance is intel fuse loads of features off per step down yet amd dont fuse whats working off.
All the chips made idealy nead selling so what gives ....
Posted on Reply
#16
NeoXF
I think the most noteworthy thing here is that FX-4350 will get the full 8MBs of L3 memory, unlike FX-4300 w/ 4MB. Some benches and clock for clock comparisons should do nice in showing how much if at all in most cases, the L3 memory matters on them FXs.
Posted on Reply
#17
SIGSEGV
by: Rahmat Sofyan
Ahhh my bad, definately I'll buy it...so tired to waiting X6 1090T to get more price cut.

how about the wattage, does it good too?

thanx mate :toast:
more price cut you said? even this processor (thuban) has been discontinued.

---------------
i'm waiting amd's steamroller chip :)
Posted on Reply
#18
Melvis
Thats some impressive out of the box clock speeds. To the noob community its a great selling point seeing the high clock speeds. Might have to build a few computers for clients with these CPU's.

The FX6350 or the older 6300 I must admit are a very all round great performance per dollar CPU. I build PC's for clients with i5's in them and that's classed as high performance but if i can get the same but for less that's a win win for me ;)
Posted on Reply
#20
NC37
by: NeoXF
I think the most noteworthy thing here is that FX-4350 will get the full 8MBs of L3 memory, unlike FX-4300 w/ 4MB. Some benches and clock for clock comparisons should do nice in showing how much if at all in most cases, the L3 memory matters on them FXs.
Yeah that will help, but the Bulldozer design is weak in the quad cores. Someone explained it once, I forget now. Benchmarks for 6 and 8 core designs always surpass the quads whether single or multiple core testing.

Pretty much the reason Trinity can be beaten by Llano in some areas. Llano was based on old Athlon IIs and Trinity is Piledriver. Not only is IPC worse but that same issue gets carried over because Trinity is only quads. Plus APUs lack L3 which hurts them more. Now if they ever released an 8 core APU...that might be something.

Course we'll be seeing 8 core APUs in the PS4 coming up.
Posted on Reply
#23
NeoXF
by: NC37
Now if they ever released an 8 core APU...that might be something.

Course we'll be seeing 8 core APUs in the PS4 coming up.
Kaveri should have a 6 core version (A12 I'd imagine), together with a moderate amount of L3 memory and vastly improved IMC... aside from that truckload of microarch and IPC improvements and die shrink.

IMHO, all in all, if everything goes well, I expect AMD to unite it's APU and FX platforms into one... and possibly phase out non-APU chips altogether... but that's probably circa the time of Excavator/2015/20nm or lower...
Posted on Reply
#24
eidairaman1
hmm hard to decide between the 95W 6300, 8300 or the 125W 4350, 6350, 8320, 8350. Since all of those have the 8MB L3 where as the 4300 has 4MB L3. or Go for a 5600K, 5800K or the Richland 6800K

I wonder if TDP affects the overclock of a chip too.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment