Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

i5 4670k VS FX 8320 VS FX 8350

Tags:
  • Overclocking
  • Gaming
  • CPUs
  • Intel i5
  • Processors
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 25, 2014 3:14:14 AM

Hey guys, I wanted to know which processor out of these 3 is best for gaming (without needing to overclock.)
i5 4670K
FX 8320
or FX 8350
Thanks!

More about : 4670k 8320 8350

January 25, 2014 3:40:53 AM

4670K.

But if you are not planning to OC, get a non K 4670 and save some cash by not getting Z87 mobo.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2014 3:46:54 AM

^ agreed. However, note that while the Intel processor here is generally better for gaming, some games are AMD optimized where the FX 8350 might perform better. Battlefield 4 is the most important example of this.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 93 à CPUs
January 25, 2014 3:49:11 AM

Specops125 said:
^ agreed. However, note that while the Intel processor here is generally better for gaming, some games are AMD optimized where the FX 8350 might perform better. Battlefield 4 is the most important example of this.

There are 2FPS difference between the 4670k and 8350 in BF4 if I remember correctly.

to OP:
The 4670k would be better at gaming, dont even think of getting 8350.
If you go with AMD get the 8320, it's the same chip as 8350.
The 8350 is just a "overclocked" version, so you pay more for something you could do yourself.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 25, 2014 7:43:03 AM

The i5 4670k is the best for gaming. Even then, the 8320 is pretty good considering its around 70$ less(!) and it only lags around 4 FPS at most in more modern games. In lightly threaded games, you will see great benefit in an i5 and the FX series cant really perform there.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 12:45:11 PM

The i5 4670k has a 3DMark11 Physics score of 6820, whereas the FX-8350 has a physics score of 6870 so it's a tad faster in that respect.

That doesn't paint a whole picture though, and you should know that the i5 has fewer cores, but they are stronger, whereas the FX-8350 has more cores, but they are weaker. That means the i5 has better single-threaded performance and the FX-8350 has better multi-threaded performance.

In Crysis 3, Far Cry 3, and Battlefield 4 (which take advantage of as many cores you can throw at them) the FX-8350 comes out on top most of the time. However, in older games and applications that don't utilize multi-threading the i5 4670k wins out most of the time.

So there you go, both are fantastic processors and each has it's strong suits.

TL;DR go with the FX-8350 if you use a lot of multi-threaded applications, go with the i5 4670k if you use a lot of single-threaded applications.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 12:54:34 PM

See these results in Bf4


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...

I5 2500k beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 1:02:07 PM

Comparing stock clocks to stock clocks, the FX-8350 has a higher minimum FPS than the i5-2500k, which is more important than the i5's slightly higher average FPS as both are well north of the 60fps avg. mark.

Also, the 2500k has a 3dMark11 Physics score of 6220 and the FX-8350 has a score of 6870 so take that as you will.

Again, for multi-threaded applications go with the FX. For single-threaded applications and older games go with the i5.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:15:52 PM

s4in7 said:
Comparing stock clocks to stock clocks, the FX-8350 has a higher minimum FPS than the i5-2500k, which is more important than the i5's slightly higher average FPS as both are well north of the 60fps avg. mark.

Also, the 2500k has a 3dMark11 Physics score of 6220 and the FX-8350 has a score of 6870 so take that as you will.

Again, for multi-threaded applications go with the FX. For single-threaded applications and older games go with the i5.



<MOD EDIT: questionable language removed. Please keep it civil in the forums>
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:21:40 PM

kooks147 said:
s4in7 said:
Comparing stock clocks to stock clocks, the FX-8350 has a higher minimum FPS than the i5-2500k, which is more important than the i5's slightly higher average FPS as both are well north of the 60fps avg. mark.

Also, the 2500k has a 3dMark11 Physics score of 6220 and the FX-8350 has a score of 6870 so take that as you will.

Again, for multi-threaded applications go with the FX. For single-threaded applications and older games go with the i5.



honestly dude stop spamming your 3d mark crap on every intel vs amd thread its a little annoying


First off, calm down "dude".

Secondly, it's correct, factual, and relevant information therefore not spam--OP asked a question, and I answered it.

I apologize that so many people are asking the same question thus warranting the same reply.

You must have a lot of angst bottled up if you consider this spam :/ 
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:44:54 PM

rolli59 said:
Unfortunately 3dmark score does not accurately represent performance and the I5 has same or better performance in 99% of all games including BF4 http://hardwarepal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/u...


I agree 100%.

As the new generation of cross-platform games start rolling out, we'll see better and better multi-threaded implementation and optimization (because the games will be developed for 8-core x86 consoles) so it'll be interesting to see how they perform on desktop hardware.

Check it out: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/
m
0
l
a c 169 K Overclocking
a c 297 4 Gaming
a c 913 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:51:45 PM

s4in7 said:
rolli59 said:
Unfortunately 3dmark score does not accurately represent performance and the I5 has same or better performance in 99% of all games including BF4 http://hardwarepal.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/u...


I agree 100%.

As the new generation of cross-platform games start rolling out, we'll see better and better multi-threaded implementation and optimization (because the games will be developed for 8-core x86 consoles) so it'll be interesting to see how they perform on desktop hardware.

Check it out: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/


Unfortunately as we start seeing these games role out in the next two years Intel will be widening the performance gap to AMD with new releases while AMD is introducing new APU's that have less CPU performance than the current FX lineup which is close to a 1 1/2 year from its latest and probably last refresh!
I buy computer parts for the now not the future and normally I keep a CPU max 4 years with a GPU upgrade in between to extend the life of it.
m
0
l
February 20, 2014 2:53:27 PM

Don't get the 8320. Period.
The 8350 doesn't perform as well as the 4670K, but the differences in **GAMING PERFORMANCE** are so small, that the 8350 is easily the better deal. If I was in your position, I would get the 8350 just for the simple fact that it's cheaper (unless the price went up, don't know).
Also, no matter which one you get, don't use the stock cooler.... especially with the 8350.

Hope this helps :D 
m
0
l

Best solution

a b K Overclocking
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:54:30 PM

T1M0N6 said:
Hey guys, I wanted to know which processor out of these 3 is best for gaming (without needing to overclock.)
i5 4670K
FX 8320
or FX 8350
Thanks!

i5 4670K

You shouldn't even consider an FX8xxx cpu UNLESS you plan to overclock. That's where their value lies. I've got mine running stable at 4.8ghz now and its very easy to do with the right motherboard and cooling.
Share
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 20, 2014 2:57:04 PM

MrBoomBoom said:
Don't get the 8320. Period.
The 8350 doesn't perform as well as the 4670K, but the differences in **GAMING PERFORMANCE** are so small, that the 8350 is easily the better deal. If I was in your position, I would get the 8350 just for the simple fact that it's cheaper (unless the price went up, don't know).
Also, no matter which one you get, don't use the stock cooler.... especially with the 8350.

Hope this helps :D 


Curious as to why you don't recommend the 8320? It's $50 cheaper and easily overclocks to the 8350's levels. I have one at 4.2Ghz which is beyond an 8350.
m
0
l
Anonymous
February 20, 2014 3:01:13 PM

i5 4670k is WAY better than both AMDs. If you're not planning to overclock, get a H87 mobo and a i5 4670 (non K). The 4670 is exactly the same as the "K" version, just not unlocked. My mobo suggestion would be the Gigabyte GA-H87M-HD3, pretty good for a fine price. Best of luck!

PS: The 4670 is like $20 more expensive than the FX-8350 for a big improvement.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 93 à CPUs
February 20, 2014 11:25:37 PM

s4in7 said:

That doesn't paint a whole picture though, and you should know that the i5 has fewer cores, but they are stronger, whereas the FX-8350 has more cores, but they are weaker. That means the i5 has better single-threaded performance and the FX-8350 has better multi-threaded performance.

Not really.

s4in7 said:

In Crysis 3, Far Cry 3, and Battlefield 4 (which take advantage of as many cores you can throw at them) the FX-8350 comes out on top most of the time. However, in older games and applications that don't utilize multi-threading the i5 4670k wins out most of the time.

BF4:
Two of previous generation I5s are on top of the 8350.
Spoiler





Crysis 3:
As we can see the i5 3550(which a 4670k should be able to outperform) is having a higher minimum framerate, it also only have 0.3 less average FPS that the 8350(which haswell improvement should fix)
Spoiler




s4in7 said:

TL;DR go with the FX-8350 if you use a lot of multi-threaded applications, go with the i5 4670k if you use a lot of single-threaded applications.

This cannot classify it. As in some scenarios 8350 would do better in multi-threaded applications meanwhile in other 4670k would do better in multi-threaded applications.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
February 21, 2014 3:59:10 AM

s4in7 said:
Comparing stock clocks to stock clocks, the FX-8350 has a higher minimum FPS than the i5-2500k, which is more important than the i5's slightly higher average FPS as both are well north of the 60fps avg. mark.

Also, the 2500k has a 3dMark11 Physics score of 6220 and the FX-8350 has a score of 6870 so take that as you will.

Again, for multi-threaded applications go with the FX. For single-threaded applications and older games go with the i5.


Accordingly fx8350 has higher score in 3dmark11 test than 2500k and 4670k.
So buddy it is clear that this test is not indicative of performance in Gaming(Which is Title of This Thread)
Bcoz even though 2500k scores less in 3dmark11 test it performs better than fx8350 in BF4.And therefore 4670k will surely outperform fx8350 by quite a margin.
And you are constantly comparing 4670k and fx8350 by 3dmark11 test.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a c 85 à CPUs
April 10, 2014 11:35:40 PM

John Jorgensen said:
Specops125 said:
^ agreed. However, note that while the Intel processor here is generally better for gaming, some games are AMD optimized where the FX 8350 might perform better. Battlefield 4 is the most important example of this.


Another dumb idiot whos WRONG< WRONG WRONG> Stop posting you retard imbred.


LMAO. You're the one who can't even spell inbred right.
m
0
l
April 10, 2014 11:43:57 PM

maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy
m
1
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 13, 2014 10:52:34 AM

limitzvfxgoespc said:
maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy


Man atleast see the results with both eyes opened. There are both OCed and stock i5 2500k in the list.

See it here
http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/B/403823/original/CPU.pn...
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a c 85 à CPUs
April 13, 2014 3:24:59 PM

maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc said:
maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy


Man atleast see the results with both eyes opened. There are both OCed and stock i5 2500k in the list.

See it here
http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/B/403823/original/CPU.pn...


The i5 2500k is the only one overclocked in that list. The rest say "stock" instead of "OC".
m
0
l
April 13, 2014 5:37:45 PM

Rationale said:
maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc said:
maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy


Man atleast see the results with both eyes opened. There are both OCed and stock i5 2500k in the list.

See it here
http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/B/403823/original/CPU.pn...


The i5 2500k is the only one overclocked in that list. The rest say "stock" instead of "OC".


+1
It just proves he's an Intel fan boy and can't get over the fact that you need to oc to get equal performance of the fx 8350, and also how much cheaper it is? 30 dollars!. You could use that to get an even better gpu or maybe a few games!

Ultimately the AMD FX8350 is over c lockable, why isn't it overclocked in this benchmark? Because Toms-hardware is fanboys of intel, because every benchmark I see, all the intel cpu's are overclocked, but not the AMD cpu's.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 13, 2014 5:48:42 PM

Intel is better for just gaming. And I love amd I have the fx 8320 and couldn't be happier . but I model and render and game on the side. Fx 8320 has its place don't worry. For just gamers Intel makes most sense
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 14, 2014 3:32:46 AM

limitzvfxgoespc said:
Rationale said:
maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc said:
maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy


Man atleast see the results with both eyes opened. There are both OCed and stock i5 2500k in the list.

See it here
http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/B/403823/original/CPU.pn...


The i5 2500k is the only one overclocked in that list. The rest say "stock" instead of "OC".


+1
It just proves he's an Intel fan boy and can't get over the fact that you need to oc to get equal performance of the fx 8350, and also how much cheaper it is? 30 dollars!. You could use that to get an even better gpu or maybe a few games!

Ultimately the AMD FX8350 is over c lockable, why isn't it overclocked in this benchmark? Because Toms-hardware is fanboys of intel, because every benchmark I see, all the intel cpu's are overclocked, but not the AMD cpu's.


Both the stock and OCed core i5 2500k top over stock fx8350. Stock i5 2500k has lower min frame rate which will definitely be handled by i5 4670. Since the OP clearly says he doesnt wants to overclock and you cant get a fx8350 without little OCing to match the levels of i5 4670 then I think i5 4670 will be better choice. The price diff btw fx8350 and i5 4670 is fairly justified if you take into account iGPU of i5 ( though not much still it is something helpful when you dont have a graphic card for some reason)
m
0
l
April 14, 2014 5:48:25 AM

maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc said:
Rationale said:
maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc said:
maktovic said:
Look at this all other people saying Bf4 will perform better on fx8350


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-4-graph...



Now u see
I5 2500k easily beats fx8350 in bf4
And mind it i5 4670k is better than 2500k in facts that it uses less power and is 11-13%faster than 2500k in single threaded applications


it's oc'd lel, intel fanboy


Man atleast see the results with both eyes opened. There are both OCed and stock i5 2500k in the list.

See it here
http://media.bestofmicro.com/L/B/403823/original/CPU.pn...


The i5 2500k is the only one overclocked in that list. The rest say "stock" instead of "OC".


+1
It just proves he's an Intel fan boy and can't get over the fact that you need to oc to get equal performance of the fx 8350, and also how much cheaper it is? 30 dollars!. You could use that to get an even better gpu or maybe a few games!

Ultimately the AMD FX8350 is over c lockable, why isn't it overclocked in this benchmark? Because Toms-hardware is fanboys of intel, because every benchmark I see, all the intel cpu's are overclocked, but not the AMD cpu's.


Both the stock and OCed core i5 2500k top over stock fx8350. Stock i5 2500k has lower min frame rate which will definitely be handled by i5 4670. Since the OP clearly says he doesnt wants to overclock and you cant get a fx8350 without little OCing to match the levels of i5 4670 then I think i5 4670 will be better choice. The price diff btw fx8350 and i5 4670 is fairly justified if you take into account iGPU of i5 ( though not much still it is something helpful when you dont have a graphic card for some reason)



I'm fine if you're a Intel fan boy. I accept it, however i don't like biased reviews from toms hardware. It doesn't at all say OC FX8350. the intel I5 4670k and 2500k are great CPU's I would of bought it if i had the money, but like the shop store said where i bought some of the stuff, they don't sell amd CPU's, because they're cheap.

Lets stop arguing and close the thread :) 
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 14, 2014 9:19:56 AM

limitzvfxgoespc
Man stop with "intel fanboy" thing. I am not posting any biased opinions. If you dont like it you can simply ignore it. Again to the question of OP if you are not OCing and to choose btw 4670 & 8350/8320 , 4670 will be better choice.

And i myself have AMD Sapphire R9 270x Vapor-x and i love it for its price/performance value.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
a b à CPUs
April 14, 2014 7:07:16 PM

maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc
Man stop with "intel fanboy" thing. I am not posting any biased opinions. If you dont like it you can simply ignore it. Again to the question of OP if you are not OCing and to choose btw 4670 & 8350/8320 , 4670 will be better choice.

And i myself have AMD Sapphire R9 270x Vapor-x and i love it for its price/performance value.


this is true, save some money, get an i5 4670, non k version since you wont be overclocking. An FX 8320 or 8350 would need a bit of overclocking (to 4.0Ghz at least) to match that i5 4670. And a bit of OC means a 30$ Hyper 212 to go with it, and by then youre already priced really close to the i5 4670.

I saw the i5 4670K on amazon a little while back for 189.99 something like that. now thats a kicka$$ deal.
m
0
l
April 15, 2014 10:42:11 PM

Beezy said:
maktovic said:
limitzvfxgoespc
Man stop with "intel fanboy" thing. I am not posting any biased opinions. If you dont like it you can simply ignore it. Again to the question of OP if you are not OCing and to choose btw 4670 & 8350/8320 , 4670 will be better choice.

And i myself have AMD Sapphire R9 270x Vapor-x and i love it for its price/performance value.


this is true, save some money, get an i5 4670, non k version since you wont be overclocking. An FX 8320 or 8350 would need a bit of overclocking (to 4.0Ghz at least) to match that i5 4670. And a bit of OC means a 30$ Hyper 212 to go with it, and by then youre already priced really close to the i5 4670.

I saw the i5 4670K on amazon a little while back for 189.99 something like that. now thats a kicka$$ deal.


that's a good deal
m
0
l
!