AMD FX-8350 Vs. Intel Core i5-4460

[Dabombinable]

@Prysin did upgrade to an i7-4790K and claims not a major difference (If I remember correctly)

I wouldn't get a Skylake i7, like ever, 5820k master race. My only concern with going 3930k over the 4770k is that it might lack some newer instructions and stuff like that, despite being much more powerful overall it could be behind in some scenarios (I'm not sure about the instructions stuff though)

Also, what is the real temperatures difference between 4790k and 4770k? does anyone know? Cause I know the Devil's Canyon was improved in terms of heat etc, but how much of that is marketing and how much of that is a real deal? @ maybe you know something about it

Considering with my Seidon 120V I can have my i5 4440 idle at ambient temperatures, I don't put much stock in Intel "improving" the TIM in Devil's canyon.

[Gandek]

More and more games are becoming multi-threaded the i5's are still better for regular tasks as they have better single core performance but gaming with a FX-8350 should be no problem everything should run very well. I have a 8320 and all my games run very well I oced mine to 4.2GHz and daily tasks run speedy as well. I would pick up a 8320 which is $30 cheaper than the 8350 and also buy a Hyper 212 EVO and just overclock it to either a 8350 or better like me. 

[Nena Trinity]

@Prysin did upgrade to an i7-4790K and claims not a major difference (If I remember correctly)

I wouldn't get a Skylake i7, like ever, 5820k master race. My only concern with going 3930k over the 4770k is that it might lack some newer instructions and stuff like that, despite being much more powerful overall it could be behind in some scenarios (I'm not sure about the instructions stuff though)

Also, what is the real temperatures difference between 4790k and 4770k? does anyone know? Cause I know the Devil's Canyon was improved in terms of heat etc, but how much of that is marketing and how much of that is a real deal? @ maybe you know something about it

90K is a better OCer I hear!

[Morgan MLGman]

Considering with my Seidon 120V I can have my i5 4440 idle at ambient temperatures, I don't put much stock in Intel "improving" the TIM in Devil's canyon.

So as I thought it's more marketing than a change. Thanks.

 

 

90K is a better OCer I hear!

I don't mind getting a lower OC, I don't want to push it to its limits, my cooler is great and as long as it's a decent overclock I'm fine with that. The 4770k is just at a price of a 4690k in Poland and it's significantly better, that's why I'm considering it. I wouldn't get a quad core, unless it was 6600k, which is stupidly expensive, so I prefer an older i7.

[Prysin]

Considering with my Seidon 120V I can have my i5 4440 idle at ambient temperatures, I don't put much stock in Intel "improving" the TIM in Devil's canyon.

the TIM made a 2 degrees C delta on average.

that and there was some adjustments to FIVR too with DC

[Prysin]

Considering the fact that very few scenarios see the GPU even coming close to their advertised computational power (eg. Bitcoin mining), I have to agree that the drivers do seem to be holding them back. And after the problems with the Crimson drivers, I don't think AMD will be actually improving them any time soon. The FX series has just hurt AMD too badly.

something you may not know, was that midway through FX "lifespan" up to now, AMD released a chipset driver that improved performance of FX CPUs.... i dunno what they did, but i know the difference was noticable in games.

 

this is probably why FX scores different when tested now, and when tested back in the days.

not to mention, games get patched too to improve shit over time....

 

as for AMDs DX11 drivers... well... AMD is nowhere near as bad as ASUS is when it comes to drivers. So i cannot complain yet...

[Dabombinable]

the TIM made a 2 degrees C delta on average.

that and there was some adjustments to FIVR too with DC

My i5 4440 still runs just as cool as my 4790K when its at the same clock speed with hyperthreading disabled. So to me it appears to be the same shitty TIM.

[Prysin]

My i5 4440 still runs just as cool as my 4790K when its at the same clock speed with hyperthreading disabled. So to me it appears to be the same shitty TIM.

compare it with HT and full load....

 

its like comparing AMD to Nvidia at idle.... doesnt matter unless you push the shit outta the product. that is when it shines

[FruitBasketSilex]

Wow, look, another amdvintel fight topic.

Let's do this.

[Morgan MLGman]

the TIM made a 2 degrees C delta on average.

that and there was some adjustments to FIVR too with DC

So is there a real difference 4770k/4790k (I'm talking 5-10 degrees) or rather a minor one? What does the second line mean, could you please elaborate?

[Dabombinable]

So is there a real difference 4770k/4790k (I'm talking 5-10 degrees) or rather a minor one? What does the second line mean, could you please elaborate?

Very minor, and a successful deliding+after market TIM makes a really big difference.

[Morgan MLGman]

Very minor, and a successful deliding+after market TIM makes a really big difference.

Nah, I'd never do that. I'm asking cause as I mentioned 4770k is at a 4690k price here, used Z87 mobos are dirt-cheap and a new 4790k costs like 1,5x the price of the mentioned previously i7 and i5

[Dabombinable]

Nah, I'd never do that. I'm asking cause as I mentioned 4770k is at a 4690k price here, used Z87 mobos are dirt-cheap and a new 4790k costs like 1,5x the price of the mentioned previously i7 and i5

Well if the motherboard allows it, you could update the bios without even installing a CPU.

[Morgan MLGman]

Well if the motherboard allows it, you could update the bios without even installing a CPU.

I mean a Z87 G1.Sniper from Gigabyte should work with a 4770k without any issues, correct?

[Dabombinable]

I mean a Z87 G1.Sniper from Gigabyte should work with a 4770k without any issues, correct?

Yep-though apparently 4790K have more capacitors under them to help with the power delivery.

[ConiferousJelly]

So after reassessing what all of you said (Sorry, cant specifically quote anyone), If budget didn't matter and I could do an i5-6600k (Cant do an i7-6700k), how would the FX-8350 stack up against the Skylake i5-6600k, and would it be better to go with the i5-6600k?

[totjup5]

Nearing 4 years old.

That was a good GPU to begin with.

1 month over 3 years is hardly "nearing 4 years"

[Dabombinable]

1 month over 3 years is hardly "nearing 4 years"

All Vishera is is Bulldozer with teaks, and its from 2011: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested

[totjup5]

All Vishera is is Bulldozer with teaks, and its from 2011: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested

The architectural similarities between bulldozer and piledriver are common knowledge, but that isn't relevant in this case, You referred to a review of the 8350 as being almost 4 years old. The fact that it is similar to an architecture from a previous year doesn't change when the article was written, and doesn't change the age of the 8350.

[BLIzzARD]

this is the reason why amds cpu dont perform well in some games. No matter how better the games are optimized for muti-threaded cpus most of the work is still done on core 0. This is limmited by the API and there is nothing that game devs or AMD can do about it. This bolleneck will be removed by the new APIs like mantel, vulcan and dx12 where the work load is spread over all cores a cpu can offer that is when we'll see the true pptential of fx(8xxx). There might be a hugh improvement or nothing at all we'll only know next year. But from what AMDs has done with r9 290x and how mutch they ware bottlenecked by the drivers i have great expectations with there cpus as well. Lets be honest we all know still games do not use more then 4 core and fx (8xxx) performace on multi-threaded applications or even benchmark is remarkable and i have even seen OCed fx 8350 performing up close to 3770k in some multi-threaded tasks. So for peoplewho recklesslly trash amd cpus wait untill the next year we'll know for sure how good fx (8xxx) is.

[Dabombinable]

this is the reason why amds cpu dont perform well in some games. No matter how better the games are optimized for muti-threaded cpus most of the work is still done on core 0. This is limmited by the API and there is nothing that game devs or AMD can do about it. This bolleneck will be removed by the new APIs like mantel, vulcan and dx12 where the work load is spread over all cores a cpu can offer that is when we'll see the true pptential of fx(8xxx). There might be a hugh improvement or nothing at all we'll only know next year. But from what AMDs has done with r9 290x and how mutch they ware bottlenecked by the drivers i have great expectations with there cpus as well. Lets be honest we all know still games do not use more then 4 core and fx (8xxx) performace on multi-threaded applications or even benchmark is remarkable and i have even seen OCed fx 8350 performing up close to 3770k in some multi-threaded tasks. So for peoplewho recklesslly trash amd cpus wait untill the next year we'll know for sure how good fx (8xxx) is.

Overclocked well past the stock i7 3770K....oh and only the FX line is trashed because its shit.

[BLIzzARD]

Overclocked well past the stock i7 3770K....oh and only the FX line is trashed because its shit.

at what point its shit except per core performace and there stock cooler man i hate that cooler...

[SkilledRebuilds]

at what point its shit except per core performace and there stock cooler man i hate that cooler...

Didn't you JUST answer it..?

[Dabombinable]

at what point its shit except per core performace and there stock cooler man i hate that cooler...

1. Extremely poor efficiency

2. Poor IPC (lower than any Core 2 Duo)

2. Heat output.

[Morgan MLGman]

Overclocked well past the stock i7 3770K....oh and only the FX line is trashed because its shit.

But define what do you mean by 'shit', do you mean you can't game with a high-end GPU, in the latest, most demanding games at ultra settings @60FPS+ using a FX processor? Cause I can prove you otherwise immediately... Or that you can't use them for heavier workloads which they excel at, at their price point of course