FX 8350 better than i5 3570k for real world gaming?

25 answers Last reply
More about 8350 3570k real world gaming
  1. wait till you get to see the power consumption numbers..
  2. They talk about power consumption in that video too.
  3. cezalinho said:


    there is something very wrong with those benchmarks. Take the farcry 3 bench for example, the i5 manages only 29 fps?? please, the game does not perform that way at all in that game in real life. Look at toms hardware benchmark or from any other REPUTABLE site

    Not to mention that ANY of those games at max detail at 1440p will be bottlenecked by the gtx670 not either of those cpu's so there shouldnt be a lot of difference in any of those benchmarks at 1440. There is something wrong with his test system and/or he is fiddling with driver settings. Im not going to actually watch that whole video i just skipped through it as it looks like a waste of time.
  4. iam2thecrowe said:
    cezalinho said:


    there is something very wrong with those benchmarks. Take the farcry 3 bench for example, the i5 manages only 29 fps?? please, the game does not perform that way at all in that game in real life. Look at toms hardware benchmark or from any other REPUTABLE site

    Not to mention that ANY of those games at max detail at 1440p will be bottlenecked by the gtx670 not either of those cpu's so there shouldnt be a lot of difference in any of those benchmarks at 1440. There is something wrong with his test system and/or he is fiddling with driver settings. Im not going to actually watch that whole video i just skipped through it as it looks like a waste of time.


    +1. Why do people have to go searching and searching for a website that shows AMD in the lead, when they can come to the most reputable site in the world(Tom's Hardware)and get real benchmark results. I mean, COME ON. Face Palm. Like how desperate can you possibly be to actually want to believe this stuff. This website is actually out to prove a point. And when you start out trying to prove something, you rarely get honest results.
  5. one 8350 consumes 3 times more power than the 3570k its so ridiculous!

    in my opinion dont watch the videos of that channel it was firstly made by amd fans!its probably the only channel on youtube supporting the amd!check the linus benchamarks as they are the most accurate!

    the 3570k gives you the option of upgrading to one i7!
  6. Gennaios said:
    one 8350 consumes 3 times more power than the 3570k its so ridiculous!

    in my opinion dont watch the videos of that channel it was firstly made by amd fans!its probably the only channel on youtube supporting the amd!check the linus benchamarks as they are the most accurate!

    the 3570k gives you the option of upgrading to one i7!


    I'll never need to upgrade to an i7 as in 100% of the things I do, it won't make a bit of a difference. And plus, my 3570k overclocked to 4.6Ghz, is faster than an i7 at everything anyways. The only reason to upgrade to an i7 is if you do a whole lot of rendering and use well threaded applications consistantly. And even with rendering and well threaded apps my i5 will beat an i7 because it's overclocked. Granted you can overclock an i7 too but personally I won't experience any faster speeds because I don't video edit or render. This is why I think an i5 for 220$ is the best processor there is for gaming, and everything else, because you can overclock it. This is the whole reason why the i5 3570k and even the i5 2500k are the most popular and well performing CPU's in the world. And with AMD constantly putting all their effort into being "well-threaded" and not putting any effort at all into actually beefing up the IPC in their processors, it will stay this way. Maybe they just quit because Intel's so far ahead so they figured they'd try other things.
  7. Check these program and gaming benchmarks out....

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=701

    The i5 3570k wins 25 benchmarks and the 8350 wins 13. The i5 wins all 4 gaming benchmarks by a long shot.
  8. i didnt mention you to my answer!anyways

    the i7 came with a new technology from intel!as i say i5 is great for gaming but for rendering i would better go for an fx!
    the 3770k makes about 7.69 points in cinebench where the 3570k makes within 5(points)!

    i mean in gaming you wont see any difference between the i7 and the i5!for rendering i use one 3770k at stock speeds with autodesk maya heavy batch renders with no problem(for such cores)!

    if someone oc the 3770k at 4.6 who would perform better?

    the 3570k oc at 4.6ghz or the 3770k oc at 4.6ghz!
    if someone wants a system just for gaming better to choose the i5 but for rendering the i7 would perform way better no issue about that!i can prove it giving some quite accurate benchmarks(actually no benchmark is very accurate)!
    friendly talking!
  9. The i5-3570k gets 29 FPS @ 1440P!!!!!

    READ WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT!!!!

    @1080P, the i5-3570k gets a much more respectable 40+ FPS

    @Gennaios:

    You're wrong about power consumption as well.

    The power consumption on the FX8350 is not drastically more than an i5-3570k or i7-3770k, as a matter of fact, the difference is so small, the AMD chip actually consumes less power when OC'ed to the same levels as the intel chips.

    @ericjohn004:

    The Tom's benchmarks are not on High/Ultra settings...that benchmark tests ONLY High/Ultra settings, which require higher CPU load. Intel looks good when you're not loading their cores, but when you start running ALOT of threads, the AMD chips come out on top.

    THAT'S what that benchmark stands to show.


  10. please man

    8350:200w on full load
    3570k:86w on full load what are you even talking about??????:no:
  11. Gennaios, please get your facts straight.

    8350:200w on full load
    3570k:86w on full load what are you even talking about??????:no:

    A FX8350 @ Full load consumes 120-145W (Not OC/OC'ed)...and since most CPUs spend 99% of their life at idle, where the AMD CPU consumes 1-2W more than a 3570k...you won't notice the difference. The chip can't consume more than 150W...the architecture would break down. So, please stop spouting numbers you pulled out of the sky.

    You do understand full load on THAT AMD chip can only currently be achieved running a benchmark, and even then, most benchmarks are not optimized to make the AMD run at full load...so you realistically only see 60-70% load...where intel chips are closer to 90% right?
  12. ok send me one benchmark saying that...!send it!
  13. Gennaios said:
    ok send me one benchmark saying that...!send it!


    I have posted benchmark after benchmark on this forum, you can find it by now...stop turning every CPU discussion into AMD vs Intel...

    Intel is about to fall from the top in the next 6-9 months...wait, watch and see...then you can say..."Hey, I knew a guy that told me that was going to happen..."
  14. dude you turned the conversation to that vs thing!i just mentioned the power consumption!what really is your problem every time?
    you are an amd fan am not a fan of no company!rive your mind!
  15. Gennaios said:
    dude you turned the conversation to that vs thing!i just mentioned the power consumption!what really is your problem every time?
    you are an amd fan am not a fan of no company!rive your mind!


    Then why do you constantly bash AMD if you're not an intel fan boy?

    Someone asks about AMD, and here you come, "They're no good...use intel"

    Stop turning everything into AMD vs. Intel over and over again, these people ask a question and get only a new raging debate about which CPU brand is better...

    The one you can afford is better...whatever that is...but don't act or speak like AMD is not a totally capable and 100% useful chip...there are benchmarks out there that show the AMD is on par with anything intel offers...at ANYTHING...
  16. i just said that the 3570k consumes less power!(what is your problem)!!log out please!
  17. Gennaios said:
    i just said that the 3570k consumes less power!(what is your problem)!!log out please!


    You picked power consumption numbers out of the sky...the 3570k, btw consumes more than 86W also, I just didn't bother to point that out to you...it's a 125W chip as well...but that's neither here nor there...

    AMD does not consume 3x the power...it's less than 10-15% more at any point...
  18. look what i found out of the sky!!!

    http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/7

    http://www.behardware.com/articles/880-4/amd-fx-8350-review-is-amd-back.html

    one of the worlds most accurate benchmark sites!!!hmmm go out in the sky and find some...!friendly log out!
    cause i bother looking your inaccurate comments!
  19. oh look...at idle there's only ~10-15 Watts difference...
  20. 8350rocks said:
    Gennaios said:
    dude you turned the conversation to that vs thing!i just mentioned the power consumption!what really is your problem every time?
    you are an amd fan am not a fan of no company!rive your mind!


    Then why do you constantly bash AMD if you're not an intel fan boy?

    Someone asks about AMD, and here you come, "They're no good...use intel"

    Stop turning everything into AMD vs. Intel over and over again, these people ask a question and get only a new raging debate about which CPU brand is better...

    The one you can afford is better...whatever that is...but don't act or speak like AMD is not a totally capable and 100% useful chip...there are benchmarks out there that show the AMD is on par with anything intel offers...at ANYTHING...


    I can agree with everything you said, AMD is a 100% capable chip, and it's good at everything. It's the last part I have a problem with. AMD is NOT as good as Intel is at EVERYTHIG. Yeah an 8350 is good with rendering and stuff that uses 8 cores(still not as good as a 3770k)but AMD is really lacking at anything that doesn't use 5+ cores. Such as single threaded apps. And there are PLENTY of them and will be for a while. Single threaded performance will ALWAYS be important, and until AMD realizes this, they will stay behind Intel. I hope they catch up so we get better CPU's every year. But from what I've seen, it's not happening anytime soon.

    Just look at the AMD FX 8350's Cinebench 11.5 score per core. It's like a .96 where even an Intel 3220's score is a 1.36. A 3570k's score is a 1.54 stock. That's over 50% more powerful.

    Something I don't think people realize is that AMD's 8350 is ALREADY clocked at 4.0Ghz and can only overclock to around 4.8Ghz normally. A 3570k and 3770k comes clocked at 3.4-3.5Ghz and can overclock to 4.8 normally. This mean that you can get 1.4Ghz more out of an Intel chip and only .8Ghz out of an AMD chip. So if your overclocking, you'll benefit way more from getting a 3570k or 3770k. Just think if a 3570k came factory clocked at 4.0Ghz. It would beat an 8350 even more than it already does.

    BTW I'm neither an Intel "Fan Boy" nor do I dislike AMD. I'm a Fact Fanboy. And the Facts determine my opinions. So basically my opinions are fact.
  21. 8350rocks said:
    The i5-3570k gets 29 FPS @ 1440P!!!!!

    READ WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT!!!!

    @1080P, the i5-3570k gets a much more respectable 40+ FPS



    it shouldnt matter the resolution since increasing resolution is not dependant on the CPU at all, its all on the video card.

    Here's a question, why are you ignoring the abundance of reviews and benchmarks from reputable sites that do not replicate these videos results at all? There are plenty of them out there of varying games, resolutions, game settings etc. The only thing this video proves is that the person doing it is a total ignoramus and clarly cant setup an intel pc to work properly, otherwise his benchmark results would match that of the other sites, or at least come a little closer to reality
  22. iam2thecrowe said:
    8350rocks said:
    The i5-3570k gets 29 FPS @ 1440P!!!!!

    READ WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT!!!!

    @1080P, the i5-3570k gets a much more respectable 40+ FPS



    it shouldnt matter the resolution since increasing resolution is not dependant on the CPU at all, its all on the video card.

    Here's a question, why are you ignoring the abundance of reviews and benchmarks from reputable sites that do not replicate these videos results at all? There are plenty of them out there of varying games, resolutions, game settings etc. The only thing this video proves is that the person doing it is a total ignoramus and clarly cant setup an intel pc to work properly, otherwise his benchmark results would match that of the other sites, or at least come a little closer to reality


    +1... Another person that's thinking clearly. I don't understand why 8350rocks has to go to other websites when he can just use Tom's as a reference. They do have benchmarks of the 8350 at higher resolutions and detail settings. Cleary, if Tom's thought the 8350 were better for gaming, they would have one of them in one of their test systems. It's no wonder why they use Intel processors even if they are using AMD video cards.

    You should see the people on Tek Syndacate. They are all big time AMD fans. And in the comments all you see is people saying "It's about time a benchmarking site tells the truth" and "All the other sites are just Intel Fanboys" and I even saw a guy with a 3570k say "I wish I would have gotten an 8350". And if you say something about Intel's single threaded dominance, everyone jumps in and says your a Fanboy. It's really quite pathetic. AMD fans I guess finally have somewhere where they can go where they actually win. According to 8350rocks, Tek Syndacate has benchmarks showing an 8350 is better than a 3930k in rendering, so you already know this site is completely BOGUS! I just don't see how delusional and downright ignorant you have to be to believe it.
  23. i came back to get a PC after a decade if not more. the last time i got a desktop, the P4 was like the i7 then. since then it has only been laptops and consoles.

    for finalising the components, i decided to build around the AMD APUs, then moved to the the FX series and finally after more than a month of reading and going through numerous benchmarks, i have a system with Intel core i5 Ivy Bridge.

    had it not been for the fact that there are reputable sites like Tom's to guide us, i was taken by the teksyndicate blasphemy.

    the fact remains that in real world the Intel chips still perform better than AMD chips at most tasks

    thanks to the community who share facts and not false information like teksyndicate

    all i care for is if its value for money for what i paid for and for the moment, even the FX 8350 did not offer it

    i am not anti AMD, neither am i pro Intel :)

    @ericjohn004 - And the Facts determine my opinions. So basically my opinions are fact. - this is true ;)
  24. Just gonna add that yeah, everybody refers to benchmarks, including myself but I don't think they show the real picture personally. Also, nobody that I have ever come across cares about PPW where power consumption is concerned.
    There really isn't much of a difference between the i5 and the 8350 where performance is concerned as they both have their pros and cons.
Ask a new question

Read More

Gaming Intel i5 CPUs