AMD FX8350

[m.pcplayer]

Hi Guys

 

Im looking to build my own rig and at the heart is AMD FX8350 with a sabretooth 990FX r2.0

 

Will this be future proof? (up to a year) And will it last to play the upcoming titles such as Watchdogs, etc.

 

Also I will be using EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB

 

Any info would be hugely appreciated.

 

Thanks 

[Ryan Leech]

Yes. If you overclock it should be good for the next 3-4 years of games.

[Rashy]

One and a half year... or two. Yeah its two

 

Yeaaaah 1000 POSSSTSSSS!!! Boom. Michael bay come here and direct my 1000 post video, no not 100 pounds of tnt i need like 10 tons.

[Faa]

Do you already have the board? If no, it doesnt make much sense to go with a 8350 at that price point.

[GPUXPert]

The 8350 is the best future proof CPU out there right now.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future-proofing-your-pc-for-next-gen

[Rheinwasser]

one year? for sure.

[Lord Pantaloons]

The 8350 is the best future proof CPU out there right now.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future-proofing-your-pc-for-next-gen

There's no such thing as future proof, having 8 cores doesn't mean shit if it's IPC is terrible.

[GPUXPert]

There's no such thing as future proof, having 8 cores doesn't mean shit if it's IPC is terrible.

Well having 8 cores means a lot since both next gen platforms are 8 core AMD based. IPC isn't terrible not at all.

In single threaded Cinebench an 8350 scores 1.1, a 3570K scores 1.5. Remember that an 8350 has twice as many cores as a 3570K.

[BookerDeWitt]

There's no such thing as future proof, having 8 cores doesn't mean shit if it's IPC is terrible.

It's funny...the game devs.... the people that make the actual games... say that in fact an 8350 IS better than a 3570K for the games that they are building and you sit there behind your keyboard spouting complete and utter misinformation, it's sad.

[GRJohn]

- snip -

- snip -

To the OP yes the 8350 is the best CPU right now for future proofing. PS4 has an 8 core AMD APU so does the xbox one. So the games are bound to be optimized for the 8 core AMD architecture. The developers are making total sense.

Edited May 12, 2014 by alpenwasser

[Lord Pantaloons]

Keep thinking whatever you want, the only reason there are AMD chips in the consoles is because AMD sells their chips for less than a bag of doritos and devs saying that it's better is only relevant for console ports which I don't care about. I'll pass on inferior cores, shared core resources, poor efficiency and power consumption and actually buy something that's worth a damn.

 

Four real cores > Four core modules

[deathjester]

Don't flame-bait it's not cool.

To the OP yes the 8350 is the best CPU right now for future proofing. PS4 has an 8 core AMD APU so does the xbox one. So the games are bound to be optimized for the 8 core AMD architecture. The developers are making total sense.

 

"Next gen" consoles use 6 cores max for games.  Two are locked to the OS and only 6 are even available for the game developer to use. Consoles have a 1.6ghz and a 1.7ghz AMD MOBILE chip, with garbage cache and they aren't equal to a desktop chip clock for clock. 

 

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/04/02/how-infamous-second-son-used-the-ps4s-8-4-5-gb-of-ram-cpu-and-gpu-compute-to-make-our-jaws-drop/

 

Watchdog's? If you actually think Watchdog's is going to require a Haswell I7? I have some scrap steel to sell you in the middle of Paris. The game runs on an Xbox 360/PS3. Thief said the same thing (that you needed an I7). This is BS marketing and if you believe it, you are really naive. A DirectX 11.x game can't even use threads/cores right. The I7 recommendation is literally impossible, especially paired with the low GPU in the recommendation (which makes it even more laughable). The next COD? Also said I7. People found out that I7 was a I7-920 from 2008 at 2.8ghz. A 4770k is literally double that CPU.

 

Ivy I3 > 8350 in Thief.

http://www.techspot.com/review/787-thief-benchmarks/

 

Ivy I3>8350 in Elder Scrolls Online.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/the-elder-scrolls-online-performance,3789-8.html

 

 

Hi Guys

 

Im looking to build my own rig and at the heart is AMD FX8350 with a sabretooth 990FX r2.0

 

Will this be future proof? (up to a year) And will it last to play the upcoming titles such as Watchdogs, etc.

 

Also I will be using EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB

 

Any info would be hugely appreciated.

 

Thanks 

 

If you play MMO's, Rust, Day-Z, want to do Wii U emulation? Don't touch AMD. If all you play are console port shooters and single player games? AMD is fine and should be for a long time. An I5 K can double the FPS in an MMO or indie game where core utilization sucks. The 8350 can get close to an I5 in GPU bound games where CPU doesn't matter and Mantle games. 

 

Make the choice based on what you play. 8320 or I5. Spend the rest on GPU. When the benchmarks come out for Watch Dog's? These people will just move to the next game, just like they did from Thief, Battlefield 4 etc. I5 will play all games well now and in the future. 8320/50 will play them well in the future, but can struggle on some now. It is really that simple. I7 and up? Overkill for gaming.

[Mistgrim]

The 8350 could easily do all that you as....maybe even for 3 years if your not too picky

[Joshua Ondangan]

1st no cpu is future proofing as there is no such thing as future proof. in the next 2 years if technology leaps out and both intel and amd starts forking out i3 with 10 cores and amd with like 10 cores. 

 

8350 would be good at most for a year unless game devs pull something out of their asses and make something totally awesome and makes use of multi cores if so then add in another year and a half.

 

any processor from amd fx 4300 and above and intel i3 2100 and above can play many games pretty much all games can be played but in the end it all ends on this list

 

-Target Resolution

-Target Settings

-Target Min FPS

 

if you target 720p with max settings all eye candy up there with 60fps then yes no problem.

 

but if you're targetting 2560x1080, 1920x1080 above. then you might experience a problem. besides cpu there are also gpu factors. heck doesn't matter if you got a killer system but if you got like 2gb ram there then there will be a bottleneck.

 

IMHO 8350 is fine and so is the 8320 depends on where you're buying but there are times you see the 8350 cheaper than the 4670k which I believe then will be a better buy. normally motherboards aren't the problem since normally people rarely buy motherboards by features but more on by looks and by brand favoritism.

 

evga 770 2gb is fine. it can even play games on 2560x1440 (old and new on mixed settings or all low or high depending on game and depending on your target fps).

[Faa]

Well having 8 cores means a lot since both next gen platforms are 8 core AMD based. IPC isn't terrible not at all.

In single threaded Cinebench an 8350 scores 1.1, a 3570K scores 1.5. Remember that an 8350 has twice as many cores as a 3570K.

Care to explain why the octacore 8350 scores exactly the same within a margin of error as a quad core such as a 4670 in the multithreaded mode? Would you deny that Intel's IPC isn't twice as fast? Then you denied that 4 by 2 isn't 8

If its IPC is only 40% slower like you claimed, Ivy bridge & Haswell each added another gain of 20%

Copy pasting from here what you've said earlier:

"Faa has a terrible reputation for bashing AMD just check his profile.

The fact is you will be much happier with an FX 8350 than a 4670k.The 4670k does in fact run much much hotter and is a terrible overclocker because of the integrated vrms.

8350 is much faster overall and competes with i7s for nearly half the price.

http://www.cpubenchm...8350 Eight-Core

http://www.cpubenchm...4670K @ 3.40GHz

 

Things you already know:

- Intels IPC is twice as fast

- Not enough games take advantage of 8 cores (6cores of a 8350 won't outperform a i5)

- You knew Intels IPC is better

What kind of guy would recommend a worst performing product thats similarly priced when he knows it isnt even better? Nothing besides your fanboyism makes sense

 

@Op what you'd be paying for a sabertooth and a 8350 (360$) you can get a 4670k & a z87 board, it just makes no sense to go with AMD that pricepoint unless you really need its 10% better multithreaded performance for rendering whatever. Don't listen to that gpuxpert, he just doesnt care about giving you the best solution for your money.

[nokturrduk84]

I already saw in this forum someone who bought 8350 after the suggestions from people like GPUexpert & he already regretted his choice. Don't listen to AMD fanboys if you don't want to share the same destiny. Just get i5 & it will satisfy you in all games.

[droidxd00d]

I have an 8150 and if I had the choice again I'd go with the i5 or an i7.

[Skanic]

My i5 2500k at 4.5 ghz has the same performance as an i5 4th gen k series at 4.5ghz .

The fx 8350 is pretty much on paar with that, You don't need anything better than i5 or fx83xx to be able to game.

The only reason i would consider buying an i7 or six core intel is if i did video editing, which i dont do, i only game.

Just get the best bang for your buck man. Both are great choices.

Nothing is future proof but for example on my pc i had the i5 2500k since it came out and it still is a pretty good CPU that was released 1st of January 2011.

I then bought an 7950 and 2 years later an r9 290.

From what i have done in gaming the only cpu intensive games are blizzard games, mmos, and thats about it.

BF4 likes both cpu and gpu, with mantle by using a amd card you even loose the cpu overhead which further improves your frames.

 

The only thing you might need to upgrade would be the gpu. every 2.5 years but then only if you really need the extra horse power.

[Faceman]

Hi Guys

 

Im looking to build my own rig and at the heart is AMD FX8350 with a sabretooth 990FX r2.0

 

Will this be future proof? (up to a year) And will it last to play the upcoming titles such as Watchdogs, etc.

 

Also I will be using EVGA GTX 770 ACX 2GB

 

Any info would be hugely appreciated.

 

Thanks 

Go Intel, Even an i3 Beats out an FX8350 for gaming.

 

Buy an i5-4670k and Z87 motherboard, you will be so much happier with your results.

[Bagmup]

Go Intel, Even an i3 Beats out an FX8350 for gaming.

 

Buy an i5-4670k and Z87 motherboard, you will be so much happier with your results.

Every amd thread is filled with this spam...

[Akolyte]

The 8350 can easily handle your hardware, and more hardware but dont expect it too be fast.  In a few years time the cpu will probably be able to handle games fine but will be so slow... 

 

But the 8350 is already pretty slow compared to Intel in single threaded tasks, The 8350 is also pretty old by now.  I recommend waiting till AMD does something new or just going for Intel because really your not getting anything new with the 8350.  I like my 4670k, but the 8350 is good too. 

 

DONT follow posts that say the i3 beats the 8350/8320!  It doesn't!  Thats fanboyism!  If you want something the same price as the 8350 thats Intel I recommend the i5 4570, not a high end i3, its really not worth it in my opinion. 

[Faceman]

The 8350 can easily handle your hardware, and more hardware but dont expect it too be fast.  In a few years time the cpu will probably be able to handle games fine but will be so slow... 

 

But the 8350 is already pretty slow compared to Intel in single threaded tasks, The 8350 is also pretty old by now.  I recommend waiting till AMD does something new or just going for Intel because really your not getting anything new with the 8350.  I like my 4670k, but the 8350 is good too. 

 

DONT follow posts that say the i3 beats the 8350/8320!  It doesn't!  Thats fanboyism!  If you want something the same price as the 8350 thats Intel I recommend the i5 4570, not a high end i3, its really not worth it in my opinion. 

Did you actually read the link?  It is exactly what you are saying, that for single threaded tasks, such as games, Intel is vastly superior to AMD.  This is not the only benchmark to prove this statement.  I'm not recommending him to buy an i3 because he clearly has the budget for an i5.  I'm showing him that a lower grade Intel is still more powerful than whatever the top of the line AMD CPU has to offer.

[Akolyte]

Did you actually read the link?  It is exactly what you are saying, that for single threaded tasks, such as games, Intel is vastly superior to AMD.  This is not the only benchmark to prove this statement.  I'm not recommending him to buy an i3 because he clearly has the budget for an i5.  I'm showing him that a lower grade Intel is still more powerful than whatever the top of the line AMD CPU has to offer.

I understand in terms of speed, but I do not beileve the i3 beats the 8320/8350.  The 8350 is compared to the 4670k, its the ammount of cores and I personally would rather buy an 8350 than deal with a dual core processor.  I may sound like a spoilt brat here but I believe that the i3 is not as powerful as the 8350.  The 8350 is overclockable and while the i3 may be faster in single threaded tasks it struggles to handle graphics cards beyond a certain point.  It would also struggle with generally cpu intensive tasks such as rendering and proffesional photo editing, as I have used an i3 before in virtual machines and video editing.  I do not beileve it is worth it in my opinion.  

 

But yeah, I do believe the i5 is better than the 8350. 

[Faceman]

I understand in terms of speed, but I do not beileve the i3 beats the 8320/8350.  The 8350 is compared to the 4670k, its the ammount of cores and I personally would rather buy an 8350 than deal with a dual core processor.  I may sound like a spoilt brat here but I believe that the i3 is not as powerful as the 8350.  The 8350 is overclockable and while the i3 may be faster in single threaded tasks it struggles to handle graphics cards beyond a certain point.  It would also struggle with generally cpu intensive tasks such as rendering and proffesional photo editing, as I have used an i3 before in virtual machines and video editing.  I do not beileve it is worth it in my opinion.  

 

But yeah, I do believe the i5 is better than the 8350. 

Read that entire review of the i3 that I posted.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/2/

 

"This is a huge result – it wasn’t until we used a Haswell core CPU that the R9 280X  was able to deliver consistent frame times and a 60 FPS frame rate in Assassin’s Creed IV. All three AMD CPUs we used – even the FX 8350 – and the Ivy Bridge Core i3 would deliver a sub 60 FPS frame rate, with frame spikes throughout the benchmark run."

 

"If you are building a system that is primarily for gaming, the Core i3 4340 will allow whatever video card you use to run at its full potential – there is no need to step up to a Core i5 or Core i7 CPU. The same could not be said for Ivy Bridge Core i3′s, or any AMD APU or CPU we have tested. Newer games seem to be even worse off, as Assassin’s Creed IV would only run at 60 FPS steadily with a Radeon R9 280X when either the Haswell Core i3 or Core i5 were used."

 

Here is another video from a different source, Austin Evans, who is claiming that the i3 is comparable to the i5.

 

Yet another benchmark done for Thief from Techspot that shows an i3 beating out an AMD FX8350.

 

     I'm not going to disagree with you that if I had to choose between an Intel i3 and an AMD 8350 that I would take the 8350 because I would want the multi-tasking power, but it is quite clear that for gaming, the Intel i3 is superior to the AMD FX8350 because of its stronger cores.  The i3 doesn't struggle to handle any graphics card that you would use on it, whereas the old architecture of the AMD seems to be bottlenecking certain video cards.  AMD 8350 + GTX 780 is getting 70-90fps in BF4, while i5 + 780 is getting 120-150fps (Check some youtube videos online make sure maps are the same, eliminate variables as much as possible etc..).  The i3 also has hyperthreading, so while it isn't as good as the 8 core AMD for editing and rendering, it should be able to hold its own.

[Akolyte]

Read that entire review of the i3 that I posted.

http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-core-i3-4340-review/2/

 

"This is a huge result – it wasn’t until we used a Haswell core CPU that the R9 280X  was able to deliver consistent frame times and a 60 FPS frame rate in Assassin’s Creed IV. All three AMD CPUs we used – even the FX 8350 – and the Ivy Bridge Core i3 would deliver a sub 60 FPS frame rate, with frame spikes throughout the benchmark run."

 

"If you are building a system that is primarily for gaming, the Core i3 4340 will allow whatever video card you use to run at its full potential – there is no need to step up to a Core i5 or Core i7 CPU. The same could not be said for Ivy Bridge Core i3′s, or any AMD APU or CPU we have tested. Newer games seem to be even worse off, as Assassin’s Creed IV would only run at 60 FPS steadily with a Radeon R9 280X when either the Haswell Core i3 or Core i5 were used."

 

Here is another video from a different source, Austin Evans, who is claiming that the i3 is comparable to the i5.

 

Yet another benchmark done for Thief from Techspot that shows an i3 beating out an AMD FX8350.

 

     I'm not going to disagree with you that if I had to choose between an Intel i3 and an AMD 8350 that I would take the 8350 because I would want the multi-tasking power, but it is quite clear that for gaming, the Intel i3 is superior to the AMD FX8350 because of its stronger cores.  The i3 doesn't struggle to handle any graphics card that you would use on it, whereas the old architecture of the AMD seems to be bottlenecking certain video cards.  AMD 8350 + GTX 780 is getting 70-90fps in BF4, while i5 + 780 is getting 120-150fps (Check some youtube videos online make sure maps are the same, eliminate variables as much as possible etc..).  The i3 also has hyperthreading, so while it isn't as good as the 8 core AMD for editing and rendering, it should be able to hold its own.

Well, that is very interesting.  My experience with the i3 (ivy bridge) was that in imovie (Yes I had OSX on it) it would constantly freeze and I would have to wait long periods of time for it to stop freezing during video editing with 100% cpu usage.  While on my 4670k I can edit videos, (in movie maker, not imovie) perfectly smooth and can render images flawlessly. I am surprised at how well the i3 performs according to the links and articles you are showing, I would still use the 8350 in my personal system but yes, I now see your point that purley for gaming. The i3 does win, thanks for showing me this.