fx 8350 vs 4670k

[linus7]

which one should i get for gaming and editing?

[Wolfur]

which one should i get for gaming and editing?

 

i5 if you want to overclock, or if you dont want to overclock:

 

Xeon e3-1230v3.

[LonliestofAll]

What programs are you going to be using for editing and what is your budget?

[helping]

8350. Is virtually the same as the i5 in gaming but better at editing.

[delet my acc pls]

If editing and game i would personally get a 8320/8350

[Wolfur]

which one should i get for gaming and editing?

 

And also are you going to make multi-gpu settings like Crossfire/SLI? you have to know so we can recommend a motherboard.

[Jack.EXE]

the i5 beats it just barely in gaming, but in multithreaded editing and recording, the 8350 destroys it.

 

So I'd say the 8350. it's close enough to the i5 when gaming, destroys it when editing or recording, and is $40 cheaper.

 

If you want to save even more go for the 8320, which with a good cooler can overclock almost as well as the 8350.

[BYOGamingPC]

Go with the AMD FX-8350 if you are planning to do some editing also.

[iSuzak]

Fx 8320 or 8350

[s3ns3]

the i5 beats it just barely in gaming, but in multithreaded editing and recording, the 8350 destroys it.

destroys it ? what ? http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=837 pay attention to 'lower is better' . even in editing/rendering the i5 is better. a xeon e3 1230V3 (i7) destroys the fx 8350 in editing and does better in gaming too.

[Jack.EXE]

destroys it ? what ? http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=837 pay attention to 'lower is better' . even in editing/rendering the i5 is better. a xeon e3 1230V3 (i7) destroys the fx 8350 in editing and does better in gaming too.

 

I got my benchmarks from the Maximum PC magazine, so I'm not sure what's the difference.

 

I guess I used the wrong word, Performs better for the money.

[s3ns3]

ok. 

 

for OP,if you are editing and gaming,go the xeon route for sure. its very good for editing and in games performs like a stock i7,which is very good.gaming=gpu

[TERAFLOP]

3D rendering performance :

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4

Video Transcoding :

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/3


Gaming on well optimized games:

[s3ns3]

where is haswell ? and ivy in bf4 and crysis ?

[Jumper118]

the 8350 isn't even better than the 4670k at multi threading until it gets past 4.6ghz. 

[WoodenMarker]

the 8350 isn't even better than the 4670k at multi threading until it gets past 4.6ghz. 

Most 8350's can regularly hit 4.8 ghz just fine.

[ALXAndy]

the 8350 isn't even better than the 4670k at multi threading until it gets past 4.6ghz. 

 

What a load of complete bollocks.

[Jumper118]

What a load of complete bollocks.

Pvt. 8Ball AMD FX8350 4.6ghz 736

 

ProKoN Intel Core I5 4670K 4.8ghz 709

 

Koori Intel Core I5 4670K 4.6ghz 682

 

considering its got twice as many cores it pretty rubbish and single thread its a joke an amd single core @5ghz can't beat a ivy i3@3.4ghz. if you play any games that were made before this year that wasn't battlefield 3 then the 8 core is using lots of power to do not very much at all.

 

Most 8350's can regularly hit 4.8 ghz just fine.

i haven't seen many people running them at 4.8ghz at all on this forum. 

[ALXAndy]

 

Pvt. 8Ball AMD FX8350 4.6ghz 736

 

ProKoN Intel Core I5 4670K 4.8ghz 709

 

Koori Intel Core I5 4670K 4.6ghz 682

 

considering its got twice as many cores it pretty rubbish and single thread its a joke an amd single core @5ghz can't beat a ivy i3@3.4ghz. if you play any games that were made before this year that wasn't battlefield 3 then the 8 core is using lots of power to do not very much at all.

 

i haven't seen many people running them at 4.8ghz at all on this forum. 

 

 

More bollocks.

 

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18544198

 

Take a look through there. You'll find that 4.8ghz is so easy even a blind person could do it. Then if you want to compare performance take a look here.

 

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18546142

 

and in particular this bit -

 

Multi thread

1610.Xeon X5650@Noidea - flippant

1292.Core i7 3930k@5Ghz - Kaapstad

1248.Core i7 3930K@4.9GHZ 6cores/12 threads - wam7

1001.Core i7 4770K@4.9GHZ 4cores/8 threads - Tonester0011

955.FX8150@6.35Ghz - Topdog555

947.Core i7 4770k@4.7Ghz - Steampunk

941.Core i7 4770K@4.6GHZ 4cores/8 threads - uksoldierboy

922.Core i7 4770K@4.6GHZ 4cores/8 threads - teppic

911.Core i7 4770K@4.5GHZ 4cores/8 threads - setter

904.Core i7 3770k@5Ghz - 4cores/8 threads - Wazza300

878.Core i7 3770K@4.8GHZ 4cores/8 threads - wazza300

861.Core i7 3770k@4.8Ghz 4cores/8 threads - Nuclear Fusion

856.Core i7 4770K@4.4GHZ 4cores/8 threads - teppic

847.Core i7 2600k@4.8GHZ 4cores/8 threads - wazza300

844.Core i7 4770K@4.4GHZ 4cores/8 threads - Tonester0011

843.Core i7 2600k@4.8Ghz 4cores/8 threads - Whyscotty

803.FX8320@5.04GHZ 4modules/8 threads - nkata

795.FX8320@5.0GHZ 4modules/8 threads - GinG

790.FX8320@5.07Ghz - ALXAndy

789.FX8320@4.96GHZ 4modules/8 threads - Orch

771.FX8320@4.8Ghz - Pazza

769.FX8320@4.9GHZ 4modules/8 threads - ouzodan

759.FX8320@4.9GHZ 4modules/8 threads - GinG

738.FX8320@4.6GHZ 4modules/8 threads - Pazza

735.Core i5 4670K@4.8GHZ 4cores/4 threads - pastymuncher

731.Core i5 4670k@4.8Ghz - Martini1991

[ALXAndy]

Then you'll find your 4670k is where it belongs. And it's exactly the same in 3dmark Firestrike physics test, Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and so on.

 

So I reiterate, you're talking bollocks.

[Jumper118]

Then you'll find your 4670k is where it belongs. And it's exactly the same in 3dmark Firestrike physics test, Crysis 3, Far Cry 3 and so on.

 

So I reiterate, you're talking bollocks.

:rolleyes:  people on ocuk are pretty hard core compared with most people. not everybody has h100's and formula v crosshair motherboards.

[ALXAndy]

:rolleyes:  people on ocuk are pretty hard core compared with most people. not everybody has h100's and formula v crosshair motherboards.

 

Oh FFS dude. Come on seriously. There are plenty of cheap boards out there with 8+2 power stages. Most cost around £80 now. There's a user in that thread called GinG or something, he spent £517 TOTAL on his PC yet holds one of the highest overclocks and best Cinebench scores.

 

You're woefully underestimating just how good these CPUS are when pushed hard, and, that they cost half of the I7 4770k yet can take nips at its ass. There's a score of 839 on a 8320 that has yet to go up.

 

The Corsair H80 right now is £36 refurb and the H100 is £39. That makes them around as cheap as any decent cooler. The H70 can be picked up second hand for around £25.

 

The 8320 here in the UK costs £113. Half of the 4770k. Does it perform half as well? When multi threaded apps are used it beats the 4670k every single time. It's £60 cheaper than the 4670k which will pay for your cooler.

 

Now obviously some of it is based on what the future holds. Yet, it's not exactly rocket science to work it out.

 

PS4 - 8 core AMD Jaguar, near on identical to FX 8 only crippled clock speeds (the Jaguar not the FX 8)

Xbox one - similar story only lamer specs. Nowhere near as good as the PS4.

 

Watchdogs recc specs - I7 or 8 core AMD. 

 

BF4 - the same.

 

As I constantly say here or anywhere, the only Intel CPU worth buying right now is the 4770K, noting the K on the end. Why? because quite frankly it's the only Intel CPU that can beat AMD conclusively and totally. But you'll pay for that, and you'll pay over double what the AMD costs. Think it's worth it? your call to make. I'll let PCper sum up the rest of the Intel range shall I?

 

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-FX-8350-and-FX-6300-Processor-Review-Vishera-Breaks-Cover/Conclusion

 

So what do we actually get with this release?  Well, it is a bittersweet release for AMD.  The pricing on these parts is not only competitive, it undercuts Intel by a significant amount across the board.  The 8350 is very competitive with the 3570K, and it can be had for $30 less.  The 6300 will walk all over the Intel products that exist at the $132 price point, and in fact is more competitive in terms of performance with the $185 Intel products.  Again, we get a nice $50 discount for essentially the same performance.  In these cases though, expect the AMD CPU to consume more power.  Would it be enough to make one nervous about energy bills?  Not really.

 

And that, to me, sums it up absolutely perfectly. Nothing Intel make below the 4770K is worth owning due to the price. And that article was written -

 

Before Windows 8 and before the FX range were even supported properly. (I'll explain that in a sec)

Before any hot fixes were released (that don't even work very well as they're crude)

Before BF4

Before Crysis 3

Before Far Cry 3

Before the consoles were officially announced... I could go on all day.

 

Look at these two links.

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2645594

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060

 

Those will basically confirm that at the time of review on PCPER neither the 6300 or 8350 even worked properly.

[Jumper118]

Oh FFS dude. Come on seriously. There are plenty of cheap boards out there with 8+2 power stages. Most cost around £80 now. There's a user in that thread called GinG or something, he spent £517 TOTAL on his PC yet holds one of the highest overclocks and best Cinebench scores.

 

You're woefully underestimating just how good these CPUS are when pushed hard, and, that they cost half of the I7 4770k yet can take nips at its ass. There's a score of 839 on a 8320 that has yet to go up.

 

The Corsair H80 right now is £36 refurb and the H100 is £39. That makes them around as cheap as any decent cooler. The H70 can be picked up second hand for around £25.

 

The 8320 here in the UK costs £113. Half of the 4770k. Does it perform half as well? When multi threaded apps are used it beats the 4670k every single time. It's £60 cheaper than the 4670k which will pay for your cooler.

 

Now obviously some of it is based on what the future holds. Yet, it's not exactly rocket science to work it out.

 

PS4 - 8 core AMD Jaguar, near on identical to FX 8 only crippled clock speeds (the Jaguar not the FX 8)

Xbox one - similar story only lamer specs. Nowhere near as good as the PS4.

 

Watchdogs recc specs - I7 or 8 core AMD. 

 

BF4 - the same.

 

As I constantly say here or anywhere, the only Intel CPU worth buying right now is the 4770K, noting the K on the end. Why? because quite frankly it's the only Intel CPU that can beat AMD conclusively and totally. But you'll pay for that, and you'll pay over double what the AMD costs. Think it's worth it? your call to make. I'll let PCper sum up the rest of the Intel range shall I?

 

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-FX-8350-and-FX-6300-Processor-Review-Vishera-Breaks-Cover/Conclusion

 

So what do we actually get with this release?  Well, it is a bittersweet release for AMD.  The pricing on these parts is not only competitive, it undercuts Intel by a significant amount across the board.  The 8350 is very competitive with the 3570K, and it can be had for $30 less.  The 6300 will walk all over the Intel products that exist at the $132 price point, and in fact is more competitive in terms of performance with the $185 Intel products.  Again, we get a nice $50 discount for essentially the same performance.  In these cases though, expect the AMD CPU to consume more power.  Would it be enough to make one nervous about energy bills?  Not really.

 

And that, to me, sums it up absolutely perfectly. Nothing Intel make below the 4770K is worth owning due to the price. And that article was written -

 

Before Windows 8 and before the FX range were even supported properly. (I'll explain that in a sec)

Before any hot fixes were released (that don't even work very well as they're crude)

Before BF4

Before Crysis 3

Before Far Cry 3

Before the consoles were officially announced... I could go on all day.

 

Look at these two links.

 

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2645594

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060

 

Those will basically confirm that at the time of review on PCPER neither the 6300 or 8350 even worked properly.

i've had an amd bulldozzer chip at 4.7ghz and its gets its arse kicked by my mates i5 3570k constantly. they are just poor they are a bit like american muscle cars, all big numbers massively fast in one way and fail at everything else. they can still do other things but they are just slow. The haswell i7's is more expensive because it is not a 2 or 3 year old cpu. a decent z77 board and a 2600k ccost about the same as the 8350's and a good board. i've weighted up the options of getting an 8320/8350 myself and ended up going intel. 

[ALXAndy]

Bulldozer was poor. Piledriver though is a totally different animal. When threaded properly it will beat the 4670k every time. And that's pretty much what we will see now. Heavily threaded games.

[Demonking]

4670K intel are better for solely gaming if you have the $ if not get a FX 8320.