Solved

FX-8350 vs i7-4770 (non-OC) for gaming + light/heavy work

I'm sure you've seen this topic come around a couple of times, but I'd like to ask one more time myself. Whenever a debate between these two processors rises, it usually escalates to an AMD vs Intel debate, and I'm hoping to avoid that this time.

Basically, what I've gathered so far is:

FX-8350 advantages:
- Better for heavy multitasking, heavy work
- On par with Intel's CPUs if you're only looking to game casually
- Better for streaming/recording while playing games
- Much lower price tag

i7-4770 advantages:
- Better for heavy gaming
- Much better for general work
- Much better power consumption than the FX-8350

(I'm getting a separate GPU, so the fact that the i7-4770 has one built in isn't important to me)

Things I'm unsure of as of yet:
- I keep hearing the FX-8350, while supposedly having 8 cores, is actually more like a 4-core CPU because it has 4 strong cores and 4 weak cores. People say that since the i7-4770 is hyperthreaded, you could also make the argument that this CPU is basically an 8-core.

- I'm not on a very tight budget so I'm inclined to go with Intel here. Sure, spending less money is always nice, but the huge power consumption of the FX-8350 makes me think I'll still break even after some years.

Since I'll be using this PC for both gaming and work. my question is basically: which of these processors would be the best to get if I want to be able to play most of the games that are out at the moment on Ultra settings at 1080p, while also being able to get some serious work done? I'm a web designer, so I'll be working with a lot of Adobe programs, maybe up to 3 simultaneously. Most importantly, I want to be able to run a heavy code editor alongside Photoshop (CS6), Adobe ImageReady and Firefox. My priority lies with my work, so how do the two CPUs compare in that area?

Thanks so much in advance, I'm really struggling with this!
9 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about 8350 4770 gaming light heavy work
  1. Why don't you opt for a 4670k...
  2. jjs0891 said:
    Why don't you opt for a 4670k...

    Because it's an i5 and I believe that my PC would benefit a lot from the i7's hyperthreading, since I'll be multitasking a lot and not just gaming. Is this a wrong assumption?
  3. OK well they are not really in the same price class. BUT the 8350 is a good multitasker compared to the I5 in its price range.
    But when it comes to any sort of memory intense task or professional work. The I7 really does show us why its priced where its priced.

    Here is a direct comparison for SPECIFICALLY for CS6. The 8350 takes 73 secs where the 4770 takes 53.
    That 38% faster.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/-35-Adobe-After-Effects-CS6,3170.html
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/compare,3168.html?prod%5B6234%5D=on&prod%5B5877%5D=on

    EDIT : Push for a decent Z77 board and the 4770K, its worth the extra cost to have the option of overclocking and SLI/Crossfire.
  4. You should look into what programs you use actually benefits from hyper threading and will make a big enough difference to just the higher price tag. The 4770 IS better than the 4670k and WILL give you better performance. But I personally think the difference is too small for an extra $100. Furthermore, the 4770 is locked and the 4670k is not.

    I don't think you should consider the FX 8350 as it's almost in every benchmark inferior to the 4670k/4770
  5. Novuake said:
    OK well they are not really in the same price class. BUT the 8350 is a good multitasker compared to the I5 in its price range.
    But when it comes to any sort of memory intense task or professional work. The I7 really does show us why its priced where its priced.

    Here is a direct comparison for SPECIFICALLY for CS6. The 8350 takes 73 secs where the 4770 takes 53.
    That 38% faster.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/-35-Adobe-After-Effects-CS6,3170.html
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2013/compare,3168.html?prod%5B6234%5D=on&prod%5B5877%5D=on


    Thanks, that's kind of what I was looking for. I'm aware that it's sort of unfair comparing the two since their prices are so different, but if the difference in performance was negligible and only really noticeable if you're a die-hard gamer, I might've gone with the FX-8350, even though it's technically worse than the i7-4770.

    The fact that the 4770 is much better at memory-intensive tasks is a big deal to me though, so I think I'll stick to that one. I'd rather spend a $100 more now and get a solid, robust and all-around CPU than save now and regret it later. One other thing that really makes me dislike the FX-8350 is the huge power consumption.
  6. Best answer
    FX-8350 is made up of 4 modules, each with two Integer clusters and a single FPU.
    Core i7 has 4 cores with hyper-threading, which basically improves scheduling to make more effective use of each core.
    Neither is an 8 core processor in the traditional sense.
    Both are an improvement on a traditional 4 core CPU.

    The attraction of the FX-8350 is in its price. I don't think you will find a single bench mark where it can outperform the Core i7 4770.
    For games, the frame rate is more likely limited by your graphics card or monitor refresh rate so it is unlikely to make a difference.
    For your other applications, the Core i7 4770 will definitely come out ahead.
    Power usage as you mentioned favours the Intel by a considerable margin.

    If recording games is of interest to you, consider an Nvidia card supporting ShadowPlay which essentially takes this task away from the CPU.
  7. If your budget allows i7 4770 then go with that. i7 4770 is an all rounder performer. FX 8350 is not a magic multitasking CPU, even in heavily threaded workload i7 4770 is still a better performer, consuming a lot lower power than FX8350 . Due to the weak single threaded performance of FX8350 you will feel slowish performance while doing simple tasks for example installing a program or a game compared to the same task doing on i7 4770 CPU. FX8350 only perform good when all the 8 integer cores are using. FX 8350 is actually a poor man's i7
  8. Thanks a lot for the help guys. I'll go for the i7-4770 then. I'm not one to OC, so I think the non-K will do fine and save me a nice bit of money as well (both on the CPU and the mobo).
  9. VincentP said:
    FX-8350 is made up of 4 modules, each with two Integer clusters and a single FPU.
    Core i7 has 4 cores with hyper-threading, which basically improves scheduling to make more effective use of each core.
    Neither is an 8 core processor in the traditional sense.
    Both are an improvement on a traditional 4 core CPU.

    The attraction of the FX-8350 is in its price. I don't think you will find a single bench mark where it can outperform the Core i7 4770.
    For games, the frame rate is more likely limited by your graphics card or monitor refresh rate so it is unlikely to make a difference.
    For your other applications, the Core i7 4770 will definitely come out ahead.
    Power usage as you mentioned favours the Intel by a considerable margin.

    If recording games is of interest to you, consider an Nvidia card supporting ShadowPlay which essentially takes this task away from the CPU.


    Just to clarify this. The 8350 is a lot closer to a true 8core than the I7 will ever be.

    The 8320/8320 only shares a very limited amount of resources that are normally not often used to its full extend by CPUs across 2 cores each. So other than these 2 resources (namely the FP schedular and the front end pipeline) there is no reason why the 8320/8350 should not be called octocores.

    HOWEVER at the moment the best reasoning WHY these CPUs do not perform as well as they should if you consider them as 8 core CPUs is a combination of poop IPC performance and the fact that software like Windows just does not know how to give this sort of CPU tasks in a meaningful and optimized way.
Ask a new question

Read More

Gaming Intel i7 Intel CPUs