OC'ed FX 4100 vs FX 8350

November 6, 2012 7:34:19 PM

I currently have an FX 4100 OC'ed on stock cooling to 4.0GHz. Stable, and does not overheat. I will either buy an aftermarket cooler and OC the FX 4100 more or buy an FX 8350. So, is there any advantage to having an FX 8350 other than programs that use many threads (video editing, image rendering, ect.)? The only game I play is Sims 3(very light on resources), but want it to be decent with Sims 4 when it probably comes out in 2014. I want the CPU to offer decent performance until 2015 when I will get a Skylake i5. I will upgrade my GPU to a Radeon 8850 from a GT 430 when it is released next year. If an FX 4100 OC'ed to 4.4-4.6GHz will be better than an FX 8350 at stock speeds then it makes more sense for me to save money on and just buy an aftermarket cooler.

More about : 4100 8350

| E-mail me updates
| Report abuse

montosaurous

November 6, 2012 7:45:32 PM

Most of the improvement is from Clock speed increase though. They are also more power efficient. So basically the extra four cores are a waste then?

| Report abuse

maxh22

November 7, 2012 1:48:57 AM

montosaurous said:

Most of the improvement is from Clock speed increase though. They are also more power efficient. So basically the extra four cores are a waste then?

Get an aftermarket cooler like the Hyper212Evo and overclock the heck out of it!

| Report abuse

chase3567

November 7, 2012 2:08:44 AM

montosaurous said:

I currently have an FX 4100 OC'ed on stock cooling to 4.0GHz. Stable, and does not overheat. I will either buy an aftermarket cooler and OC the FX 4100 more or buy an FX 8350. So, is there any advantage to having an FX 8350 other than programs that use many threads (video editing, image rendering, ect.)? The only game I play is Sims 3(very light on resources), but want it to be decent with Sims 4 when it probably comes out in 2014. I want the CPU to offer decent performance until 2015 when I will get a Skylake i5. I will upgrade my GPU to a Radeon 8850 from a GT 430 when it is released next year. If an FX 4100 OC'ed to 4.4-4.6GHz will be better than an FX 8350 at stock speeds then it makes more sense for me to save money on and just buy an aftermarket cooler.

To answer your question, I had a FX 6100 OC to 4.3ghz and I bought a FX 8350 and at stock speed of 4.0ghz it kicked the 6100 in the ass. I now have it OC to 4.8ghz and it's a beast. No contest compared to a 4100 and yes it would be a big upgrade. You should have compared the 4300 to the 4100 (Dangi) that would be the 7%-15% increase over the 4100.

But if your just playing the Sims just overclock your current process. Just had to say this because I hate misinformation being put out.

| Report abuse

satyamdubey

CPUs Authority

November 7, 2012 3:39:30 AM

Am3+ will be available for a couple more years with the cpu architectures to come from AMD in that period. 8350 is a great cpu, which is giving mid range locked i5 from SB a very tough competition. That's promising improvement. This might mean that "Steam roller" would be a further improvement and I'd suggest you wait for it. If you don't want to, then go with 8350 as it is better in overclocking head room and would easily hit 5 GHz with comparatively lower power consumption.

| Report abuse

montosaurous

November 7, 2012 4:04:31 AM

I only have a 970 board, so I doubt AMD would have SR support it. Since PD and BD are very similar in architecure, I assume most of the increase comes from clock rate. I use Windows 8, which I hear improves the FX 8150 & 8350's . I would maybe OC the FX 8350 to 4.2GHz, but not much more. I'm more interested in per core performance. I'm not sure if I'd ever be able to fully utilize all 8 cores, and if per core performance is similar between the two CPUs it would be pointless to upgrade. Buying an SSD might prove to be more worthy of an upgrade.