why do people bash the amd fx 8350

[Analog]

Also what do you think the future is for the Amd chip, because in newer games I notice the gap between Intel clossing dramatically

 

I don't know what exactly you mean here. AMD has been behind on the technology for some time and that is why there performance per clock is so bad compared to Intel processors. As for now, the AMD FX lineup is discontinued. There are some rumors that AMD might pick up the pace with a new socket and new processors, but I believe the ETA was somewhere in 2016, if I am not mistaken. In the meantime they continue on with their APUs. 

[ohJey]

i'm talking about the general amount of help Given/asked for compared to, well, L.T.T

It's ok I forgive you

[Fred Castellum]

any one who uses FB to get Tech tips or trash some product, is trash him self 

I wouldn't go as far as to say they are trash themselves for using facebook for tech advice. Just uneducated, due to the amount of misinformation that goes on there. 

[PeterK]

Fanboys/Benchmark scores a bit lower than the respective intel cpus/They just don't know/Consumption/Heat/Age of chipset

 

I think even an FX-4300 (overclocked of course) can handle moslty everything (i mean games , and general purpose) , 

FX-6300 oc'ed is enough for everything

 

The FX-8350 is REALLY good comapable to a smaller , 22nm die i7-4770k , while being much (i think by a third or even more) much cheaper , it's the best bang for buck -for performance , whilst the FX-6300 is the absolute bang for buck .

Some bash cause an aftermarket cooler is actually needed (but i think for the 4770k is needed too). 

 

Overall DUNNO they just speak without knowing....

 

I own a FX-6300 cpu oc'ed to 4.3GHz paired with a Zalman CNSP10XOptima 2011 , and with a 25'C ambient temp craws up to 62'C and then stays between 61-64'C in prime 95 , well draws like 125watts/h too but come on...

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

It's ok I forgive you

Sorry if it Offended you in any way mate 

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

I wouldn't go as far as to say they are trash themselves for using facebook for tech advice. Just uneducated, due to the amount of misinformation that goes on there. 

Uneducated for those who use FB for tech tips, and Trash for those who Talk shit bout hardware On FB, and i know why, because nearly every body on FB are Non-Techies 

[Fred Castellum]

-snip-

Welcome to the forums new guy~

 

 

Don't forget to read the CoC here!

[Fred Castellum]

Uneducated for those who use FB for tech tips, and Trash for those who Talk shit bout hardware On FB, and i know why, because nearly every body on FB are Non-Techies 

Well ignorance is bliss after all. 

[Humbug]

fx-8350 does not receive a lot of bashing.

You should have seen What happened when the fx-8150 came out.

[LawrenceBarnes2013]

Well ignorance is bliss after all. 

True .

[Misanthrope]

8350 user here. For some of the games I play which are not multithreading friendly (Hawken, Mechwarrior Online, Minecraft) I am forced to run at a lower settings than what my gpu can achieve (290X). It's a decent chip and a great value for people who uses multithreading friendly softwares but for the average gamer the single thread performance of the 8350 is terrible. It's rare to find games where 8350 matches it's intel equivelant... Most often it trails behind it's equivalent or get harrased by i3... 

 

TL;DR: Single threaded performance which majority of the games still depend on sucks therefore the 8350 is bashed

 

No it is not. I understand your point but you must look at the price difference: It's intel equivalent it's a 4460 but like it's been mentioned before, the 8320 is just a lot better and that drives price down all the way down to i3 levels.

 

If you do a fair price matched comparison of a 4630 vs 8320 then the i3 it's still way better for single core performance, but the 8320 becomes a lot better for multi-threaded performance. That tells me that for it's price the AMD processor it's still decent enough for moderate to high quality gaming while still leaving an extremely competent system for multi-tasking and such.

 

Also you can heavily overclock the 8320, you can even get significant gains on just the stock cooler. That's very important for enthusiasts and gamers.

[ltguy]

If no one wants to bash it I will. I bash it because of what it replaces. It was a step in the wrong direction for amd. They took the phenom ii x6 (which i own several of) which had 6 physical seperate cores, and replaced it with a quad core chip that has two integer units per core (the fx 8350) (so its floating point performance is absymal). Not only that but its IPC improvements over the phenom ii and offerings from intel were lackluster. I dont care about its "value" (they could reduce the price to $10 and sure thats a great value, but stil not a signifcant technology advance for amd). I also bash it because its so long in the tooth and needs to be replaced/updated. I bash it because they are no matx/mini itx 970/980/990 motherboards.

[Guest Kloaked]

By 'those' i take it you mean the 4770k right?

Yezzur

[MEC-777]

The 83XX CPUs are excellent gaming and general use CPUs for their respective price points. The socket may be dead but they are far from being obsolete. From what I've seen they've proven to be worthy gaming CPU for the long-haul with their strong overclocking capabilities.  

 

Yeah, they have poor IPC per core, but there is actually no real discernible difference in terms everyday use. It's not like you fire up your PC with an FX CPU and go "oh man my PC is so slow, must be the low IPC!". There are other limiting factors in a PC that are far greater bottlenecks (storage devices etc.). The FX are still plenty fast for most tasks. The only time you really see them fall off is with games and programs limited to 2 or less cores/threads or games that are very poorly optimized. 

 

As Misanthrope said, we should compare CPUs at similar price points and overall performance, not based on number of cores/threads.

[That Norwegian Guy]

You get what you pay for. Really that's all there is to it. It's not bad when price is factored into the equation.

 

Unfortunately, a lot of AM3+ motherboards downright suck ass and is why I sometimes "bash" the platform - even the standard "go to" motherboard, the Gigabyte GD4 or whatever the number is has major issues with RAID. All of the AM3+ motherboards have some sort of bug except the Sabertooths.

[Yoinkerman]

I hope it doesn't compare to Intel chips that are 1.5x ++ more expensive

[Guest Arshi]

Hey all, I got the Amd fx 8350 for my first gaming rig and everywhere people say it's terrible for gaming you have to lower settings to medium because of the cpu bottleneck well I been playing skyrim, far cry 3 etc and it performs beautifully so why bash it?

Intel fan boys. The 8350 is a great chip! 

BTW, I have a Intel too so.....

[jdsb52]

You get what you pay for. Really that's all there is to it. It's not bad when price is factored into the equation.

 

Unfortunately, a lot of AM3+ motherboards downright suck ass and is why I sometimes "bash" the platform - even the standard "go to" motherboard, the Gigabyte GD4 or whatever the number is has major issues with RAID. All of the AM3+ motherboards have some sort of bug except the Sabertooths.

agree, I got a sabertooth rev.1, but they do lack some of the features that are put on intel boards that are not specific to intel themsevles!

[Faa]

Because its price/gaming performance is complety awful. FX 6300 100$ - 8350 200$ 33% multithreaded performance boost that didnt come to life yet. Sure it has a decent multithreaded performance/price ratio but thats complety irrelevant for the majority of us and even if you need it you're still better off with a 4670k since that 8350 is at best 5% faster.
 

Intel fan boys. The 8350 is a great chip! 

BTW, I have a Intel too so.....

If it's a great cpu then it wouldn't struggle competing with i7's from 2008. It's just an old cpu and anyone who bought it got ripped off, you were better off buying those old i7 nehalems that go for 50$. They've seen too many gpu bound benchmarks thinking the 8350 is on par with i5's and apparently it becomes the best budget cpu. Think it gets clear that 8350's "outstanding price/performance" is a delusion
 

fx-8350 does not receive a lot of bashing.

You should have seen What happened when the fx-8150 came out.

8350 = 8150. 10% IPC at best. Apparently a 10% IPC boost is enough to make bulldozer a great unbeatable futureproof best value cpu or even better giving Logan plenty of reasons to fabricate benchmarks with a 350% fps difference in a gpu bound game.

[Bloodkil933]

 

Because its price/gaming performance is complety awful. FX 6300 100$ - 8350 200$ 33% multithreaded performance boost that didnt come to life yet. Sure it has a decent multithreaded performance/price ratio but thats complety irrelevant for the majority of us and even if you need it you're still better off with a 4670k since that 8350 is at best 5% faster.

 

If it's a great cpu then it wouldn't struggle competing with i7's from 2008. It's just an old cpu and anyone who bought it got ripped off, you were better off buying those old i7 nehalems that go for 50$. They've seen too many gpu bound benchmarks thinking the 8350 is on par with i5's and apparently it becomes the best budget cpu. Think it gets clear that 8350's "outstanding price/performance" is a delusion

 

8350 = 8150. 10% IPC at best. Apparently a 10% IPC boost is enough to make bulldozer a great unbeatable futureproof best value cpu or even better giving Logan plenty of reasons to fabricate benchmarks with a 350% fps difference in a gpu bound game.

 

Congratulations, not only do you look like a complete fanboy, buy you do realise that an 8350 is a VERY good chip for price/performance, you compare it to an Intel chip of it's time, it's exchanging blows quite happily.

 

You pretty much just proved EXACTLY what the OP has described.

 

Look at Tek Syndicate's Benchmarks:

 

AMD 8350 - 7970

Crysis 3 - Stock Clock

• 1080p - Max - 20.00
• 1080p - No Filters - 32.20
• 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 35.68
• 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 54.20

• 1440p - Max - 13.48
• 1440p - No filters - 21.96
• 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 22.88
• 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 39.04

 

Intel i7 3770k

Crysis 3 - Stock Clock (No Crossfire for Stock Clock)

• 1080p - Max - 18.72
• 1080p - No Filters - 29.80

• 1440p - Max - 11.16
• 1440 - No Filters - 18.32

 

 

Source: https://teksyndicate.com/videos/crysis-3-benchmarks-amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-i7-3770k-both-overclocked

 

 

Forgive me but that says that the 3770k performs worse the 8350 AND costed nearly £100 more, please educate yourself with facts before you say something as stupid as that.

[ericlee30]

Because they do not have anything better to do.

[amintha1992]

most of them dont have a valid reason.

[Faa]

Congratulations, not only do you look like a complete fanboy, buy you do realise that an 8350 is a VERY good chip for price/performance, you compare it to an Intel chip of it's time, it's exchanging blows quite happily.

People who call people a fanboy are usually DIE-HARD AMD F*CKYEAH fanboys. 

 

You pretty much just proved EXACTLY what the OP has described.

 

I'm about to prove you wrong now.

 

Look at Tek Syndicate's Benchmarks:

Only AMD fanboys would link teksyndicate benchmarks and live in fantasy worlds where x cpu performs 350% better than the other one in a GPU bound scenario. In arma 2 the i5 has 15 fps and the 8350 55fps >.>

What about we get proper benchmarks out?

Source: http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-core-i7-3770k--4.8ghz--multi-gpu-gaming-performance/17494.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vr-zone+(VR-Zone+%7C+Coolest+Gadgets+for+Men%2C+Geek%2C+Nerd%2C+Overclockers+and+Enthusiast)

Have fun theyve tested more games: http://www.hardwarepal.com/planetside-2-cpu-benchmark/

 

Forgive me but that says that the 3770k performs worse the 8350 AND costed nearly £100 more, please educate yourself with facts before you say something as stupid as that.

Yeah couldn't agree more >.> Any kind of i5 wiped the floor with your 8350@5GHz in terms of performance and value. Lets start; your cpu costed 200$ your mobo 100$ and your cooler 100$. All what a 4670k needs is an evo 12 and the cheapest z87 board to hit its max clock. That price comes down to 300$ orsomething. And all you need for a locked i5 is a 40$ H81 board and no cooler.

Lets put it in price/performance ratio.

- Your 8350 at 5GHz: 19/400 = 0.0475 ratio

- i5K at stock: 32/300 = 0.1067 ratio

- i5 with stock cooler and cheapest lga1150 board: 30/230 = 0.13 ratio

Like I said earlier:

 

 

It's just an old cpu and anyone who bought it got ripped off

Which gives us the perfect conclusion that you spent your money stupidly. Only an amd fanboy would do this. You could have gotten a 4770k for that price and a lil bit more a 4930K & cheapest S2011 board. A wonky performing 2000$ build in 2014 overclocked at 5GHz thats being owned by a e8500 in cinebench singlethreaded is funny: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlC81MjwelBgdEZNV3l6aHl1eUNwSUR4Rml0MXMzN1E&usp=sharing#gid=1

Clearly I am the guy who should educate myself with facts. Hope this explains why 8350's have an awful price/gaming performance ratio. 

[Guest Arshi]

 

Because its price/gaming performance is complety awful. FX 6300 100$ - 8350 200$ 33% multithreaded performance boost that didnt come to life yet. Sure it has a decent multithreaded performance/price ratio but thats complety irrelevant for the majority of us and even if you need it you're still better off with a 4670k since that 8350 is at best 5% faster.

 

If it's a great cpu then it wouldn't struggle competing with i7's from 2008. It's just an old cpu and anyone who bought it got ripped off, you were better off buying those old i7 nehalems that go for 50$. They've seen too many gpu bound benchmarks thinking the 8350 is on par with i5's and apparently it becomes the best budget cpu. Think it gets clear that 8350's "outstanding price/performance" is a delusion

 

8350 = 8150. 10% IPC at best. Apparently a 10% IPC boost is enough to make bulldozer a great unbeatable futureproof best value cpu or even better giving Logan plenty of reasons to fabricate benchmarks with a 350% fps difference in a gpu bound game.

 

WoW Gaming MMO

 

Encoding

[Faa]

WoW Gaming MMO

That's gpu bound. Outside of heavy populated cities or 25m raids/40vs40 battlegrounds there's no way you're max'ing the gpu out or 100 fps.

GPU loads just left from vcore