AMD FX 8350 Equivalent?

[Aero_Films]

So i'm trying to do a close comparison..What intel cpu is the 8350 equal to?

[Bad 💀 Motha]

In between a 3770 and 4690K
This is going off Cinebench, and assuming the 8350 is at stock clock & turbo

So lets say you upgrade, a 6500 or 6600K would be above and beyond that of both a 4690K and 8350

[SundownKid]

Prolly something like i3-2130 in terms of singlecore performance

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-2130-vs-AMD-FX-8350

i3-3210 beats it in single core performance.

Essentially its on par with Sandy Bridge CPUs although Sandy Bridge would beat it easily if overclocked.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Yes unfortunately; the FX CPUs are an odd apple in that regard.

FX-8350 and A10-7850K are very similar in Single-Thread Core performance (around that of a i3)

But in Multi-Threading, the 8350 blows any APU away; and sits right up there with most i5/i7 Quads

[upcoast]

http://www.techspot.com/review/1148-tom-clancys-the-division-benchmarks/page5.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/1128-rise-of-the-tomb-raider-benchmarks/page5.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/1096-star-wars-battlefront-benchmarks/page3.html

So much depends on the game ^, 2 games that rely more so on intel single core strength are gta 5 and fallout 4.

If you already own the 8350 and have a 990/990fx motherboard you could try overclocking it first before you jump ship but to be honest if I was going to ditch my 8350 I'd be seriously looking at the i7 6700k you might as well make the jump worth while.

Ps, as far as sundownkid's idea I have to say it's stupid, FX8350 to i3 2130 is just dumb.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKfUEWjrAYM

1231 v3 is still going to pull ahead of both overclocked or stock i5 6500 (you need an old bios to oc 6500).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZN64tKL1e8

[banzaigtv]

Average performance is similar to an i5-2500k.

[hawkeye]

For gaming a non-OC FX8350 is slower than an i5-6400:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_Y6HvTQvRI

Gaming = single thread & quad thread scores:

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-6400-vs-AMD-FX-8350/3512vs1489

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-6100-vs-AMD-FX-8350/3511vs1489

On utility apps such as video conversion, the FX8350 will be faster.

[®NapalmSunrise®]

banzaigtv a écrit :

Average performance is similar to an i5-2500k.

Have to disagree and here's why.. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780

Now if you look under the turbo speed it's 4.2ghz on the FX 8350 ? Thats actually lower than the default Turbo clock.. Now this is my result with my personal OC turned off and turbo enabled

http://i.imgur.com/nkeixti.png

Pretty interesting..

[hawkeye]

NapalmSunrise® ECWC a écrit :

banzaigtv a écrit :

Average performance is similar to an i5-2500k.

.....

Pretty interesting..

Why?

[®NapalmSunrise®]

hawkeye a écrit :

NapalmSunrise® ECWC a écrit :

.....

Pretty interesting..

Why?

Their results at 4.2ghz and mine at 4.35ghz, pretty interesting gap in scores..

[hawkeye]

NapalmSunrise® ECWC a écrit :

hawkeye a écrit :

Why?

Their results at 4.2ghz and mine at 4.35ghz, pretty interesting gap in scores..

I think you may have misunderstood the scores. The Passmark rating is the system as a whole - cpu, memory, gpu, ssd, hdd. And the FX has 8 threads which will inflate the result. Same for the cpu rating. The rating you need to check is the single threaded score (which is the best indicator of gaming performance for a cpu).

The passmark single thread score I get for my i7-2600 in power saving bios settings with turbo disabled is 1903, which is almost identical to the passmark score of 1921. So their scores are accurate.

In the link above about i5-6400 the commentator makes these remarks:

"The FX-8350 could be a good fit for specific server use cases but for general consumer use, which is single and dual core intensive, Intel's two year old i5-2500K delivers better performance."

[®NapalmSunrise®]

hawkeye a écrit :

NapalmSunrise® ECWC a écrit :

Their results at 4.2ghz and mine at 4.35ghz, pretty interesting gap in scores..

I think you may have misunderstood the scores. The Passmark rating is the system as a whole - cpu, memory, gpu, ssd, hdd. And the FX has 8 threads which will inflate the result. Same for the cpu rating. The rating you need to check is the single threaded score (which is the best indicator of gaming performance for a cpu).

The passmark single thread score I get for my i7-2600 in power saving bios settings with turbo disabled is 1903, which is almost identical to the passmark score of 1921. So their scores are accurate.

In the link above about i5-6400 the commentator makes these remarks:

"The FX-8350 could be a good fit for specific server use cases but for general consumer use, which is single and dual core intensive, Intel's two year old i5-2500K delivers better performance."

No I understand the scores just perfect, im not just speaking in terms of just single core performance, im speaking about the CPU as a whole, as for my Single core score its 1819 , the 6400 is 1822, The default Pass single core score is 1503 for the FX8350 ? As for the 2500k 1955, pretty small gap . But once again their FX8350 scores are just way off.

My point to begin with was 1st off Passmark scoring the FX8350 at 4.2ghz with turbo ? why in the heck 4.2ghz ? Default turbo and depending on the mobo will set it to 4.3ghz to 4.4ghz , Resulting in higher actual scores as I presented..

As for gaming even in heavily dependant on single and dual core games I'll especially call out the Bohemia series which even hinders many I5 and 7 users as well as AMD could yes run better if properly optimized but runs pretty darn well on my 8350 and even better overclocked. As for any new title , no issues here holding 60 fps with very high to ultra settings with a 970 SSC.. I say very high for GTA V, held down by vram if U try to max it, lol..