AMD FX-8350 vs The Competition

[guitarmatt99]

Hello! I have recently upgraded my graphics card to an AMD Radeon 6670 2GB (I know it's no the greatest but it's a huge improvement over what I had).

I am now after a new CPU and I'm struggling to choose the one I want.

I will be gaming (Minecraft, Battlefield 3, Euro Truck, Sim City etc.). Also I will use it for programming, some 3D modelling, photoshop, illustrator etc. as well as everyday use!

My CPU is currently the bottleneck of my system being an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5000+.

I have a few choices.

1)
AMD FX-8350 with 4GB DDR3 Ram.

2)
Intel i5 3470 with 4GB DDR3 Ram.

3)
AMD FX-8320 with 8GB DDR3 Ram.

4)
AMD FX-6350 with 8GB DDR3 Ram and some spare cash for lets say a new graphics card?


So what do you think? Please suggest any other options if you have any!

 

[logainofhades]

5) An FX 6300 with 8gb ddr3 and even more cash for a new graphics card. FX 6350 is just and overclocked 6300. It will match the 6350 with just a multiplier bump.

 

[guitarmatt99]

5) An FX 6300 with 8gb ddr3 and even more cash for a new graphics card. FX 6350 is just and overclocked 6300. It will match the 6350 with just a multiplier bump.

So will this card be okay for games for let's say the next 3 years? I don't upgrade that often!

Also, how does this compare to lets say the intel i5 3470?

 

[Gaidax]

AMD FX-8320 with 8GB DDR3 Ram.

This should cover you with CPU for all you ever need, buy graphics card later.

 

[logainofhades]

5) An FX 6300 with 8gb ddr3 and even more cash for a new graphics card. FX 6350 is just and overclocked 6300. It will match the 6350 with just a multiplier bump.

So will this card be okay for games for let's say the next 3 years? I don't upgrade that often!

Also, how does this compare to lets say the intel i5 3470?

If you want Ivy i5 CPU performance out of the box, the FX 8320 is the way to go. But if you want better gaming performance now, an FX 6300 and better GPU will do better than any of the other CPU's listed and what you have now for GPU. All FX series chips are overclockable as well. A well overclocked FX 6300 @ 4.5ghz, is on average, just under a stock i5 3570k in gaming performance with all else equal. I would say about equal to an i5 2400 or 2500 and close to a 3350p. 4.5-4.7 is common on the FX 6300, from my understanding.

 

[guitarmatt99]

AMD FX-8320 with 8GB DDR3 Ram.

This should cover you with CPU for all you ever need, buy graphics card later.

5) An FX 6300 with 8gb ddr3 and even more cash for a new graphics card. FX 6350 is just and overclocked 6300. It will match the 6350 with just a multiplier bump.

So will this card be okay for games for let's say the next 3 years? I don't upgrade that often!

Also, how does this compare to lets say the intel i5 3470?

If you want Ivy i5 CPU performance out of the box, the FX 8320 is the way to go. But if you want better gaming performance now, an FX 6300 and better GPU will do better than any of the other CPU's listed and what you have now for GPU. All FX series chips are overclockable as well. A well overclocked FX 6300 @ 4.5ghz, is on average, just under a stock i5 3570k in gaming performance with all else equal. I would say about equal to an i5 2400 or 2500 and close to a 3350p. 4.5-4.7 is common on the FX 6300, from my understanding.

Thanks! I think 8 cores for the moment is a bit overkill for my needs, the FX-6350 is only £5 more that the 6300 so it doesn't matter too much which one I get. I've never overclocked before and I don't know whether I will.

 

[guitarmatt99]

I think I have decided on the FX-6350, I only have 1 small extractor fan and a small case, will I need more cooling considering it's AMD?

 

[gamerk316]

Notice how no one bothered to provide any benchmarks to make their argument:

Games:

Multimedia:

Office/Productivity:

 

[jaguarskx]

The i5-3470 generally performs better than the FX-8350. However, it can only be overclocked by 400MHz with a Z87 chipset motherboard.

The FX-8350 lags behind the i5-2500k and likely the i5-3470 in BF3. However, BF4 is better optimized for AMD CPUs so the FX-8350 does beat the i5-2500k and matches the i5-2600k. I don't recall seeing any Ivy Bridge CPUs in that chart. But I would say the the FX-8350 will beat the i5-3470, but not as much as compared to the i5-2500k.

Minecraft is a CPU dependent game so it will likely perform better with it i5-3470. However, it doesn't strike me as a game where you will see much of a difference between 40FPS and 60FPS.

Racing games are generally not very CPU dependent so performance will likely be pretty similar as long as the CPU is no so weak that it actually bottlenecks the graphics card.

Overall, if you want good game performance now, then go with option #4. Get the FX-6300 / FX-6350 and a better graphics card.

If you want to by GPU later then go with option #1 or #2. I lean more towards #2, the i5-3470 because the FX-8350 simply consumes too much power for my tastes, and that is before you even overclock it. While the i5-3470 can only be overclocked 400MHz with a Z87 chipset mobo, 400MHz for an Intel CPU is more performance than 400MHz for an AMD CPU. But like I said at stock speeds for both CPUs, the i5-3470 is the overall winner.

Taking power consumption out of the picture, the FX-8350 would be the better choice as long as you overclock the CPU.

SimCity Benchmark:
http://www.techspot.com/review/648-simcity-performance/page4.html

 

[guitarmatt99]

Notice how no one bothered to provide any benchmarks to make their argument:

I've seen my fair share of benchmarks, wanted to see peoples personal opinions but it looks like Intel runs away with it, but it it worth another £50? I don't think so.

 

[logainofhades]

I actually did base my comment on benchmarks with regards to overclocked 6300/6350 @ 4.5ghz vs a 3570k. I swear you Intel fanboys get so butthurt anytime anyone recommends AMD for anything. It is common knowledge that an i5 trades blows with 83xx depending on title and clock speed. An i5 4670k isn't worth the added cost vs an FX 8320 if BF4 results are any indication. That is unless you are willing to spend an extra $75 for a whopping 3-5fps. FX 8320 bumped to an FX 8350 stock speed vs a 4670k with everything else being equal. I would rather spend that $$ on a better GPU or just pocket it for something else.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-overclocking,3584-19.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1823222/battlefield-beta-4670k-amd-8350.html

 

[guitarmatt99]

The i5-3470 generally performs better than the FX-8350. However, it can only be overclocked by 400MHz with a Z87 chipset motherboard.

The FX-8350 lags behind the i5-2500k and likely the i5-3470 in BF3. However, BF4 is better optimized for AMD CPUs so the FX-8350 does beat the i5-2500k and matches the i5-2600k. I don't recall seeing any Ivy Bridge CPUs in that chart. But I would say the the FX-8350 will beat the i5-3470, but not as much as compared to the i5-2500k.

Minecraft is a CPU dependent game so it will likely perform better with it i5-3470. However, it doesn't strike me as a game where you will see much of a difference between 40FPS and 60FPS.

Racing games are generally not very CPU dependent so performance will likely be pretty similar as long as the CPU is no so weak that it actually bottlenecks the graphics card.

Overall, if you want good game performance now, then go with option #4. Get the FX-6300 / FX-6350 and a better graphics card.

If you want to by GPU later then go with option #1 or #2. I lean more towards #2, the i5-3470 because the FX-8350 simply consumes too much power for my tastes, and that is before you even overclock it. While the i5-3470 can only be overclocked 400MHz with a Z87 chipset mobo, 400MHz for an Intel CPU is more performance than 400MHz for an AMD CPU. But like I said at stock speeds for both CPUs, the i5-3470 is the overall winner.

Taking power consumption out of the picture, the FX-8350 would be the better choice as long as you overclock the CPU.

I was thinking of what will happen in the future, considering games will start to be better optimised for AMD because of next gen consoles (generally games are ported to PC). Power isn't too much of an issue. I wouldnt be able to get a new GPU right away but it gives me some extra money for one in the future, I think the FX-8350 may be a bit overkill for now, I think the FX-6350 is the way to go for me, anything is going to be better that what I have got plus it's only £95! Another plus, twice the RAM!

 

[guitarmatt99]

I actually did base my comment on benchmarks with regards to overclocked 6300/6350 @ 4.5ghz vs a 3570k. I swear you Intel fanboys get so butthurt anytime anyone recommends AMD for anything. It is common knowledge that an i5 trades blows with 83xx depending on title and clock speed. An i5 4670k isn't worth the added cost vs an FX 8320 if BF4 results are any indication. That is unless you are willing to spend an extra $75 for a whopping 3-5fps. FX 8320 bumped to an FX 8350 stock speed vs a 4670k with everything else being equal. I would rather spend that $$ on a better GPU or just pocket it for something else.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-overclocking,3584-19.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1823222/battlefield-beta-4670k-amd-8350.html

Please don't start any fanboy arguments, I've seen far too many of them! Truth is there for different people, people who have the money, and people who don't. They both produce great products but I agree with you, AMD for me!

AMD gets you far more bang for your buck.

 

[logainofhades]

I actually did base my comment on benchmarks with regards to overclocked 6300/6350 @ 4.5ghz vs a 3570k. I swear you Intel fanboys get so butthurt anytime anyone recommends AMD for anything. It is common knowledge that an i5 trades blows with 83xx depending on title and clock speed. An i5 4670k isn't worth the added cost vs an FX 8320 if BF4 results are any indication. That is unless you are willing to spend an extra $75 for a whopping 3-5fps. FX 8320 bumped to an FX 8350 stock speed vs a 4670k with everything else being equal. I would rather spend that $$ on a better GPU or just pocket it for something else.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-overclocking,3584-19.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1823222/battlefield-beta-4670k-amd-8350.html

Please don't start any fanboy arguments, I've seen far too many of them! Truth is there for different people, people who have the money, and people who don't. They both produce great products but I agree with you, AMD for me!

I am only a fanboy of great deals. I take pride in being a cheapskate when I can do so. AMD right now is the best for a budget gamer. If not for Microcenter, I wouldn't even have my 3570k I bought last year. I needed something quick and their motherboard combos made it impossible to resist. Had the FX 8320 been out back then, I would have grabbed that instead. I wouldn't ever consider a faildozer and a PhII would have been a downgrade. My i5 750's motherboard in my file server I thought was going bad. I had to stick with Intel in that rig due to my Raid 5. So, my i5 2400 went into that system leaving me needing a new CPU and board for my gaming rig. 3570k and Z77 extreme4 combo was pretty much impossible to beat at the time. My i5 750 and motherboard was like $225 when I bought it from a friend and my i5 2400 CPU was free from another friend. Just had to buy the P67 extreme4 for it. :lol:

 

[Avro Arrow]

And now, the Battlefield 4 results: