Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11

AMD FX-8350 Review: Does Piledriver Fix Bulldozer's Flaws?
By

Futuremark’s attempt to capture overall gaming performance with its 3DMark benchmark sees AMD’s FX-8350 improve on the FX-8150 by several hundred points, placing it behind the pricier Core i5-3570K and Core i7-3770K CPUs. 

That’s a really big generalization, though. The sub-tests are where we see how each platform affects the overall gaming experience.

The only CPU that seems to impact graphics performance is AMD’s Phenom II X6 1100T, but only by a couple of percentage points. Everything else is on almost-identical footing as the Graphics suite purposely isolates our GeForce GTX 680.

The Physics sub-test is where processor performance plays a predominant role, as Futuremark partitions the simulated world it creates into several isolated regions, creating multiple threads.

When it’s fully taxed, the FX-8350 is able to best Intel’s Core i5-3570K, a $230 quad-core chip. Turning on Hyper-Threading on the Core i7, however, kicks performance up another notch.

The Combined sub-test also exhibits plenty of difference between processors. It’s threaded insofar as the simulated world is partitioned into multiple regions. The outcome isn’t the same as the Physics test, though, because there’s a considerable graphics workload applied as well. As we’ll see in the real-world game testing, AMD’s chips have a tendency to bottleneck our GPU, and so the FX-8350 slides down in the field behind three Ivy Bridge-based processors.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 293 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 50 Hide
    sixdegree , October 23, 2012 4:32 AM
    AMD is doing good with the pricing this time. This is what AMD should be: aggressively priced CPU with added features.
  • 48 Hide
    esrever , October 23, 2012 4:33 AM
    The price is actually nice this time. Hopefully AMD sticks around and gives good deals like this for years to come.
  • 47 Hide
    amuffin , October 23, 2012 4:17 AM
    Looks like AMD did pretty well with the 8350.

    I now really don't see people purchasing it though....people will be buying the 8320.
Other Comments
  • 47 Hide
    amuffin , October 23, 2012 4:17 AM
    Looks like AMD did pretty well with the 8350.

    I now really don't see people purchasing it though....people will be buying the 8320.
  • 41 Hide
    kracker , October 23, 2012 4:32 AM
    Interesting, nice improvement over BD, it spars very closely or beats the i5-3570K sometimes, It really can't compete with intel's high end, but nevertheless good job AMD!
  • 50 Hide
    sixdegree , October 23, 2012 4:32 AM
    AMD is doing good with the pricing this time. This is what AMD should be: aggressively priced CPU with added features.
  • 48 Hide
    esrever , October 23, 2012 4:33 AM
    The price is actually nice this time. Hopefully AMD sticks around and gives good deals like this for years to come.
  • 32 Hide
    Anonymous , October 23, 2012 4:34 AM
    Nice job AMD. It just kept itself afloat! Not performance killer, but good enough to get a chunk of desktop sales just in time for the holiday season. Probably wouldn't buy it over an Intel system because most apps are still quite single threaded, but I would certainly consider it. Welcome back to the race AMD. Keep up the good work!
  • 0 Hide
    najirion , October 23, 2012 4:37 AM
    so... amd will still keep my local electric provider happy. Good job AMD but I think FM2 APUs are more promising. The fact that APUs alone can win against intel processors if discrete graphics is not involved. Perhaps AMD should focus in their APU line like integrating better gpus in those apus that will allow dual 7xxx graphics and not just dual 6xxx hybrid graphics. The entire FX architecture seems to have the issue with its high power consumption and poor single-thread performance. Better move on AMD...
  • 26 Hide
    dscudella , October 23, 2012 4:38 AM
    I would have liked to see more Intel offerings in the Benchmarks. Say an i3-2120 & i3-3220 for comparisons sake as they'll be cheaper than the new Piledrivers.

    If more games / daily use apps start using more cores these new AMD's could really take off.
  • 20 Hide
    EzioAs , October 23, 2012 4:42 AM
    Interesting. Probably not a gamers first choice but for users who regularly use multi-threaded programs, the 8350 should be very compelling. About $30 cheaper than a 3570K and can be overclock as well, video/photo editors should really consider this. It doesn't beat current Intel CPUs in power efficiency but at least it's significantly more efficient than Bulldozer.

    Thanks for the review.
    Btw Chris, how many cups of joe did you had to take for the overclocking testing? ;) 
  • 9 Hide
    gorz , October 23, 2012 4:49 AM
    I think the fx-4300 is going to be the new recommended budget gaming processor. Good price that is only going to get lower, and it has overclocking.
  • 31 Hide
    blazorthon , October 23, 2012 4:51 AM
    looniamsorry just not overly impressed.5-12% performance increase 12% less power - sound familiar?the only difference this time was less hype before the release. (lesson well learned AMD!)


    You seem to forget that unlike Intel's Ivy compared to Sandy, Vishera versus Zambezi leaves Vishera the superior overclocker as well as cooler-running and with superior overclocking price/performance ratios. There's also the fact that AMD did this on the same process node, not that that matters as anything other than a foot note.
  • 27 Hide
    m32 , October 23, 2012 4:51 AM
    Just imagine if this would have been BD? Less people issed off'ed and us AMD/competition fans would have been happy with AMD's offering.
  • 11 Hide
    blazorthon , October 23, 2012 4:52 AM
    Honestly, I'm disappointed in Vishera. Comparing it to Trinity, it seems that the L3 cache doesn't actually make a difference in performance for these chips. Maybe its L3 cache's latency is simply too high for it to do much of anything other than suck power. Some CPU/NB frequency overclocking tests might be able to confirm this and if so, solve the problem and let Vishera really pull ahead of Zambezi and Trinity.
  • 20 Hide
    cangelini , October 23, 2012 4:57 AM
    EzioAsInteresting. Probably not a gamers first choice but for users who regularly use multi-threaded programs, the 8350 should be very compelling. About $30 cheaper than a 3570K and can be overclock as well, video/photo editors should really consider this. It doesn't beat current Intel CPUs in power efficiency but at least it's significantly more efficient than Bulldozer.Thanks for the review. Btw Chris, how many cups of joe did you had to take for the overclocking testing?

    One really big one. Kept me up till 5AM this morning ;-)
  • 9 Hide
    rdc85 , October 23, 2012 4:58 AM
    So AMD FX-83xx will direct compete with I5-35xx........ (both in term of price and performance)...

    Anyway it good upgrade for owner with am3+ board... (including me :D , add another item in wish list)
  • 18 Hide
    matthelm , October 23, 2012 5:01 AM
    Quote:
    ... Denmark paying $.40/kWh ...


    If you are paying that much, why would you let it set idle, turn it off instead!
  • 15 Hide
    Onikage , October 23, 2012 5:01 AM
    i realy wish to know how 8350 compete against my 2700K, to bad they had only 3700 series in there....
    But wow! at only 195$ this 8350 looks like a clear winner! Nice Comeback AMD !
  • 23 Hide
    Darkerson , October 23, 2012 5:11 AM
    Not bad at all, considering. There may be hope yet for AMD. :D 
  • 20 Hide
    EzioAs , October 23, 2012 5:11 AM
    Quote:
    i realy wish to know how 8350 compete against my 2700K, to bad they had only 3700 series in there....
    But wow! at only 195$ this 8350 looks like a clear winner! Nice Comeback AMD !


    It really isn't a cut & dry black & white situation. Depends on the workloads and purpose...
  • 7 Hide
    Anonymous , October 23, 2012 5:21 AM
    too bad they didn't open up with a lower price as the article hinted at.

    for now i'll pass. if it was truely under $200 i would consider it for my next low end system, but so far the price is well over $200 and not worth it.

    amd fx-8350 for $219.99
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284&name=Processors-Desktops

    intel i5-3470 for $199.99
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115234

    intel i5-3570 for $214.99
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115233

    intel i7-3770 for $299.99
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116502
Display more comments