• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

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

Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
1,888 (1.01/day)
Likes
742
Location
CZ
System Name TITAN Slayer / CPUCannon / MassFX
Processor i7 5960X @ 4.6Ghz / i7 3960x @5.0Ghz / FX6350 @ 4.?Ghz
Motherboard Rampage V Extreme / Rampage IV Extreme / MSI 970 Gaming
Cooling Phanteks PHTC14PE 2.5K 145mm TRs / Custom waterloop / Phanteks PHTC14PE + 3K 140mm Noctuas
Memory Crucial 2666 11-13-13-25 1.45V / G.skill RipjawsX 2400 10-12-12-34 1.7V / Crucial 2133 9-9-9-27 1.7V
Video Card(s) 3 Fury X in CF / R9 Fury 3840 cores 1145/570 1.3V / Nothing ATM
Storage 500GB Crucial SSD and 3TB WD Black / WD 1TB Black(OS) + WD 3TB Green / WD 1TB Blue
Display(s) LG 29UM67 80Hz/Asus mx299q 2560x1080 @ 84Hz / Asus VX239 1920x1080 @60hz
Case Dismatech easy v3.0 / Xigmatek Alfar (Open side panel)
Audio Device(s) M-audio M-track / realtek ALC 1150
Power Supply EVGA G2 1600W / CoolerMaster V1000 / Seasonic 620 M12-II
Mouse Mouse in review process/Razer Naga Epic 2011/Razer Naga 2014
Keyboard Keyboard in review process / Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2014/Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2011
Software Windows 7 Ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate
Benchmark Scores cinebench 15.41 3960x @ 5.3ghz Wprime32m 3.352 3960x @ 5.25ghz Super PI 32m: 6m 42s 472ms @5.25ghz
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.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
Then how do you explain the linear scaling of compute power to each core? Hyper-threading doesn't enable the extra threads to scale as well as having "real cores" so the benefit is highly variable and doesn't always provide an extra core worth of compute. If you look at what happened to AMD processors, single threaded applications took a hit, but multi-threaded applications that use it worked very well. Consider for a moment the performance boost in multi-threaded applications as AMD optimizes the core, shrinks the die, and crams more cores on the die. By sharing the floating point unit (keep in mind that a lot of FP-intensive applications are starting to get programmed on GPUs now, not a lot, but they're cropping up) AMD can optimize what the CPU needs to be good at. A lot more integer math gets done in a processor than floating point math for the average user and generally speaking unless you're doing a lot of parallel floating point operations, you won't take a huge performance hit because at that point you should be considering OpenCL for large amounts of data and I think AMD's is hoping that you will get or use an AMD GPU to improve your floating point performance because there are huge benefits to be had when you can make your FP code run in parallel. Obviously the industry isn't there yet, but it will be before you know it. Also consider all the optimizations that this architecture could use, it is new and AMD needs time to work out the bugs. All things considered I think they're doing the best they can against Intel considering revenue and usable income.
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.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
274 (0.10/day)
Likes
85
Location
Unknown
System Name ASAS
Processor Intel Core i5 2500K @ 4.2 GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-Z68A-D3-B3
Cooling Scythe Ashura
Memory Patriot 2x4GB DDR3 1600MHz 9-9-9-24 T1 @ 1.5V
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Gaming
Storage Samsung 830 256GB + Samsung Spinpoint T133 HD400LJ 400GB
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster EX1920
Case Bitfenix Ghost
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC889
Power Supply Seasonic S12II-620 Bronze 620W
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit SP1
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.
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
 
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,416 (1.23/day)
Likes
1,049
System Name My baby
Processor Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.5GHz, 1.45v, NB @ 2700Mhz, HT @ 2700Mhz - 24hr prime95 stable
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V EVO
Cooling Sonic Tower Rev 2 with 120mm Akasa attached, Akasa @ Front, Xilence Red Wing 120mm @ Rear
Memory 16 GB G.Skills 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) ATI ASUS Crossfire 5850
Storage Samsung 1Tb EcoGreen hard drive
Display(s) Hanngs-G 19"
Case Antec VSK 2000 Black Tower Case
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR309 Receiver, 2x Kef Cresta 1, 1x Kef Center 20c
Power Supply OCZ StealthXstream II 600w, 4x12v/18A, 80% efficiency.
Software Windows Vista X64
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

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.

I 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.
This part I'm in disagreement with. Gaming no. Everything else maybe.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
APU's if you are going to game are still better bang for the buck.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
397 (0.21/day)
Likes
83
Location
Brooklyn, New York
Processor AMD FX-9790 at 4.65 GHZ
Motherboard Asus Crosshairs V rev 1.0
Cooling Swiftech H320 cpu liquid cooling
Memory G. Skill Trident X 8GBx2 (16 GB) 2400 mhz dimms
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon R9 290
Storage 1 TB Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 500 GB Samsung 840 Sata III SSD, Samsung 840 PRO 240 GB Sata III SSD,
Display(s) Samsung 23 inch LDEC monitor
Case Rosewill BlackHawk Ultra Full Tower Gaming Case
Power Supply Seasonic 860 watt Platinum Plus 80 psu
Software Windows 8.1 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench 11.5 64 bit Open GL 81.46 FPS Cinebench 11.5 CPU 7.93
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
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:
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
397 (0.21/day)
Likes
83
Location
Brooklyn, New York
Processor AMD FX-9790 at 4.65 GHZ
Motherboard Asus Crosshairs V rev 1.0
Cooling Swiftech H320 cpu liquid cooling
Memory G. Skill Trident X 8GBx2 (16 GB) 2400 mhz dimms
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon R9 290
Storage 1 TB Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 500 GB Samsung 840 Sata III SSD, Samsung 840 PRO 240 GB Sata III SSD,
Display(s) Samsung 23 inch LDEC monitor
Case Rosewill BlackHawk Ultra Full Tower Gaming Case
Power Supply Seasonic 860 watt Platinum Plus 80 psu
Software Windows 8.1 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench 11.5 64 bit Open GL 81.46 FPS Cinebench 11.5 CPU 7.93
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.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
11,507 (3.96/day)
Likes
6,264
Location
Ohio
System Name Daily Driver
Processor 7900X 4.5GHz 10c/10t 1.15V.
Motherboard ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe
Cooling MCR320 + Kuplos Kryos NEXT CPU block
Memory GSkill Trident Z 4x8 GB DDR4 3600 MHz CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080 FTW3
Storage 512GB Patriot Hellfire, 512GB OCZ RD400, 640GB Caviar Black, 2TB Caviar Green
Display(s) Yamakasi 27" 2560x1440 IPS
Case Thermaltake P5
Power Supply EVGA 750W Supernova G2
Benchmark Scores Faster than most of you! Bet on it! :)
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
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.
http://www.overclockers.com/amd-fx-8350-piledriver-gaming-comparison
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
397 (0.21/day)
Likes
83
Location
Brooklyn, New York
Processor AMD FX-9790 at 4.65 GHZ
Motherboard Asus Crosshairs V rev 1.0
Cooling Swiftech H320 cpu liquid cooling
Memory G. Skill Trident X 8GBx2 (16 GB) 2400 mhz dimms
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon R9 290
Storage 1 TB Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 500 GB Samsung 840 Sata III SSD, Samsung 840 PRO 240 GB Sata III SSD,
Display(s) Samsung 23 inch LDEC monitor
Case Rosewill BlackHawk Ultra Full Tower Gaming Case
Power Supply Seasonic 860 watt Platinum Plus 80 psu
Software Windows 8.1 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench 11.5 64 bit Open GL 81.46 FPS Cinebench 11.5 CPU 7.93
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
11,507 (3.96/day)
Likes
6,264
Location
Ohio
System Name Daily Driver
Processor 7900X 4.5GHz 10c/10t 1.15V.
Motherboard ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe
Cooling MCR320 + Kuplos Kryos NEXT CPU block
Memory GSkill Trident Z 4x8 GB DDR4 3600 MHz CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080 FTW3
Storage 512GB Patriot Hellfire, 512GB OCZ RD400, 640GB Caviar Black, 2TB Caviar Green
Display(s) Yamakasi 27" 2560x1440 IPS
Case Thermaltake P5
Power Supply EVGA 750W Supernova G2
Benchmark Scores Faster than most of you! Bet on it! :)
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:
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
2,995 (0.64/day)
Likes
609
Location
Ancient Greece, Acropolis (Time Lord)
System Name My Red Dragon Gaming PC
Processor AMD FX-8350 @ 4.40GHz w/8-Cores - Bus 277 / 1.35v
Motherboard Asus Crosshair V Formula ROG - Bios v1801
Cooling Corsair H100 Water Cooling (120mm x4 Push/Pull)
Memory G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB DDR3-2210 (8GBx2)
Video Card(s) SAPPHIRE (ATI) DUAL-X R9 280X 3GB GDDR5 OC + Sapphire Radeon RX 580 8GB Nitro+ LE
Storage Corsair Force 3 SSD 180GB + WD 32MB buffer 1TB HD
Display(s) Asus 24" (VG245H) FHD 75Hz 1ms FreeSyn - Gaming Monitor
Case CoolerMaster HAF 932 - My Custom Red Dragn MOD!
Audio Device(s) SteelSound 5Hv2 8CH HD + EAX® Advanced™ HD 5.0 -SupremeFX X-Fi 2
Power Supply Corsair 750W Gamers Power Supply
Mouse Razer DeathAdder PC Gaming Mouse - Ergonomic Left Hand Edition
Keyboard Logitech G15 Classic Gaming Keyboard
Software Windows 10 x64 Ultimate
Benchmark Scores I have the worlds Fastest PC ever Built - 1980
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:
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
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
11,507 (3.96/day)
Likes
6,264
Location
Ohio
System Name Daily Driver
Processor 7900X 4.5GHz 10c/10t 1.15V.
Motherboard ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe
Cooling MCR320 + Kuplos Kryos NEXT CPU block
Memory GSkill Trident Z 4x8 GB DDR4 3600 MHz CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1080 FTW3
Storage 512GB Patriot Hellfire, 512GB OCZ RD400, 640GB Caviar Black, 2TB Caviar Green
Display(s) Yamakasi 27" 2560x1440 IPS
Case Thermaltake P5
Power Supply EVGA 750W Supernova G2
Benchmark Scores Faster than most of you! Bet on it! :)
I posted it as it has information they are talking about... that's it!
 

Frick

Fishfaced Nincompoop
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
14,880 (3.45/day)
Likes
5,413
System Name A dancer in your disco of fire
Processor i3 4130 3.4Ghz
Motherboard MSI B85M-E45
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 4 x 4GB Crucial Ballistix Sport 1400Mhz
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 760 DCU2OC 2GB
Storage Crucial BX100 120GB | WD Blue 1TB x 2
Display(s) BenQ GL2450HT
Case AeroCool DS Cube White
Power Supply Cooler Master G550M
Mouse Intellimouse Explorer 3.0
Keyboard Dell SK-3205
Software Windows 10 Pro
Joined
Oct 29, 2012
Messages
1,888 (1.01/day)
Likes
742
Location
CZ
System Name TITAN Slayer / CPUCannon / MassFX
Processor i7 5960X @ 4.6Ghz / i7 3960x @5.0Ghz / FX6350 @ 4.?Ghz
Motherboard Rampage V Extreme / Rampage IV Extreme / MSI 970 Gaming
Cooling Phanteks PHTC14PE 2.5K 145mm TRs / Custom waterloop / Phanteks PHTC14PE + 3K 140mm Noctuas
Memory Crucial 2666 11-13-13-25 1.45V / G.skill RipjawsX 2400 10-12-12-34 1.7V / Crucial 2133 9-9-9-27 1.7V
Video Card(s) 3 Fury X in CF / R9 Fury 3840 cores 1145/570 1.3V / Nothing ATM
Storage 500GB Crucial SSD and 3TB WD Black / WD 1TB Black(OS) + WD 3TB Green / WD 1TB Blue
Display(s) LG 29UM67 80Hz/Asus mx299q 2560x1080 @ 84Hz / Asus VX239 1920x1080 @60hz
Case Dismatech easy v3.0 / Xigmatek Alfar (Open side panel)
Audio Device(s) M-audio M-track / realtek ALC 1150
Power Supply EVGA G2 1600W / CoolerMaster V1000 / Seasonic 620 M12-II
Mouse Mouse in review process/Razer Naga Epic 2011/Razer Naga 2014
Keyboard Keyboard in review process / Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2014/Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2011
Software Windows 7 Ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate / Windows 7 ultimate
Benchmark Scores cinebench 15.41 3960x @ 5.3ghz Wprime32m 3.352 3960x @ 5.25ghz Super PI 32m: 6m 42s 472ms @5.25ghz
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