1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX-8350 4.0 GHz - "Piledriver" for AMD Socket AM3+

Discussion in 'Reviews' started by cadaveca, Oct 19, 2012.

  1. buildzoid

    buildzoid

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,105 (1.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Location:
    CZ
    gaming CPUs

    I just read a preformance overview of the new FX series on guru3D and basically the FX 4300/6300 will give you very similar FPS at less power and cash than FX 8350/8320 now considering the architecture is almost identical for these CPU they will overclock to almost the same levels the 6300 cost 75$ less than the 8350(40$ less than i5 3570k) the 4300 80$ less and since games only use a few threads a max of 4 then you could get the 6300 or the 4300 and get it to 4.5-5.0Ghz with a little over 3/4 or 1/2 power consumption. the 6300 is a bit slower/faster in pretty much all benchmarks against the i5 3570k so If I wanted 1 or 2 GPU only gaming rig I'd go AMD.
    HD64G says thanks.
  2. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,178 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,137
    Careful with the "real core" issues there.

    AMD "cores" aren't even "real cores", take one out by itself and it won't operate, it requires the rest of the shared hardware its twin is using.


    AMD and ATI have both had a history of making hardware to do things that software was not ready for, and about 50% of the time or better it flopped.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  3. Ghost

    Ghost

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    272 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    Unknown
    You got something wrong. i5 will give better performance in games than any AMD CPU. i5 3570K costs the same, draws less power and is around 20-30% faster than FX-8350 in games. That's with single GPU. Dual high-end system would be severely bottlenecked by FX.

    Here's FX-8350 vs i7 3770K with 2x HD 7970s. i5 is identical to i7 in most games.
    http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-...hz--multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494-1.html
  4. Dent1

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,123 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    899

    But how many people can afford one 7970 let alone two for Crossfire. Whilst I'd agree there is a deficiency in high-end multi GPU gaming performance few users will opt for such an expensive setup.

    I think the broader message buildzoid was trying to convey was the similarities in gaming performance between the FX 4300, 6300, 8350 and 8320 which is sort of true.

    This part I'm in disagreement with. Gaming no. Everything else maybe.
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  5. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,178 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,137
    APU's if you are going to game are still better bang for the buck.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  6. os2wiz

    os2wiz

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    387 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    83
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York
    You are making a genralization that just does not hold up with many of the newer games. The FX 8350 betters the I5 3570k and equals the I7 3770k in games like Battlefield III , Sleeping Dogs. In poorly designed single threaded games or games that are cpu bound that may be a different stiory. But more and more of the better games are taking advantage of multi-cores as many as 8!!! Wake up a new day is here.
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
    Super XP says thanks.
  7. os2wiz

    os2wiz

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    387 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    83
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York
    The Power PC was a great chip. It was too bad IBM is pretty much out of the cpu business. They had great fabrication and great design teams. They also had the most advanced desktop and server operating system:
    OS/2. Far better design than Windows, The Workplace Shell gui was better than windows as well. They made the mistake of trusting Microsoft and it cost them big time.
  8. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,166 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    630
    http://www.overclockers.com/amd-fx-8350-piledriver-gaming-comparison
    Super XP and os2wiz say thanks.
  9. os2wiz

    os2wiz

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    387 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    83
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York
    There is absolutely nothing factually wrong with what I stated. I qualified my statement if you bothered to read it in its entirety. I said many ,not most, of the new games are being designed for multi core processors. I said that is becoming an icreasing trend and it is. I know what the reports say and it does not negate my observations. Analyze my friend , rote responses lack analysis.
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
  10. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,166 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    630
    I dont recall calling anyone out (reads post again to be sure...NOPE)... just adding a link for you guys to chew on. Put it back in your pants, there is no need for that...in fact, doesnt my link actually support what you are saying as far as the performance goes? :slap:
  11. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,754 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    That is why you posted the link right? This clearly shows Once Again, in GAMING both Intel and AMD are competative. Anybody thinking otherwise is delusional. :D
    Pehla says thanks.
  12. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,166 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    630
    I posted it as it has information they are talking about... that's it!
  13. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,476 (3.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,137
    *sarcasm*
  14. buildzoid

    buildzoid

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,105 (1.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    293
    Location:
    CZ
    what I was aiming at with my post was to point out that in games the FX 6300/4300 will be practically equal to the FX 8350 while costing less and consuming less power. If 8350 isn't too far behind the i5 3570k but consumes too much power and doesn't need all the cores then the 6300 and 4300 make ideal cheap gaming CPUs because your only losing cores which won't mean anything in most games. Since they run on less power they should hit higher overclocks than the 8350 and match the i5 in gaming especially the cheap i5s like the 3470

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page