AMD Vishera CPU FX-8350 review (MyGaming)

VegOtter said:
Nice one AMD, ball's in your court now Intel. Intel's response will probably be heavily pricey though.
Click to expand...

What ball?

From what I can see it is "like" performance and not ZOMG performance, or I'm looking at the wrong ones.


Random cs 1)
View attachment 3762


Random cs 2)
after%20effects.png


We ran her through the twisties. We did the drag racing. We measured her mileage. We even popped her hood to figure out what makes this little speedster tick. In every way, today’s FX-8350 is better than the FX-8150 that preceded it. Faster. More efficient. Cheaper. And, when you look at the fairly minor improvements Intel made to its Ivy Bridge architecture, FX-8350 competes more readily against higher-end competition.

I’m going to have to resign myself to forgetting what the FX brand once meant, though. Almost a decade ago, an FX was something that made Intel scramble to respond. It represented cutting-edge. And it set you back more than $700 bucks. Today, we have to ooh and aah over performance victories against the middle of Intel’s desktop line-up—its Core i5-3470 and -3570K—all the while shrugging off fairly severe discrepancies in energy efficiency. There. I’m done. Back to 2012.

As I was saying, with my barometer of success recalibrated, FX-8350 is a much stronger contender than FX-8150 was. It reclaims ground that AMD’s Bulldozer architecture gave up. The Piledriver architecture doesn’t cure all that afflicted Bulldozer, but subtle design and process tweaks adjust power use down, allowing the company to nudge its flagship’s clock rate up without violating a 125 W TDP. The changes aren’t dramatic, but they’re substantial enough to create a good comparison against Intel’s highest-end Core i5. So there’s that.

Of course, if AMD had excitedly recognized good progress and tried to charge the same $245 it thought FX-8150 was worth a year ago, I’d be setting FX-8350 aside as quickly as I did with last year’s model. Instead, the company is asking for less than $200. That puts the FX-8350 on par with Intel’s Core i5-3470—a multiplier-locked part that it outperforms in a great many demanding desktop apps. In those same applications, the FX is usually able to beat the $230 Core i5-3570K, too. It’s only when you look back at the single-threaded stuff that AMD continues to get creamed.

But then there’s power to consider. In the United States, we’re blessed to have relatively inexpensive energy. We tend not to flip out over 50 W unless dissipating that heat requires a noisy fan. But if you’re in Denmark paying $.40/kWh, just the 10 W difference between Core i5 and FX-8350 at idle costs you several bucks per month. Under load, you’re looking at up to a $15-a-month difference for a system running 24/7. Advantage: Intel.

So, let’s try to distill all of this down into a recommendation. Recognizing that the power user community gives AMD more latitude than Intel, I anticipate a greater number of enthusiasts getting excited about FX-8350 than any of the Bulldozer-based CPUs, and rightly so. More speed, significantly improved efficiency, and a sensible price tag are exactly what I was hoping to see, and AMD delivers them all. Are you asked to make compromises? Yeah. Single-threaded performance still isn’t impressive, and power consumption remains a sore subject. But for less than $200, I can certainly see FX-8350 at the heart of a budget-oriented workstation.

Would FX-8350 be my first choice in a new build, though? Probably not. Although I’m impressed by the work AMD’s architects have done in the last year, performance remains too workload-dependent. And, inexpensive energy aside, I’m going to go with the more efficient implementation when all else is close to equal.

[link]
Click to expand...
 
Pr⊕phet said:
How does this compare with the 3770K ?

nm:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-vishera-review,3328-11.html
Click to expand...

Well its not meant to go up against the 3770k...as the 3770k is around $100 more.
As a workstation machine this chip will be fantastic, Intel offers nothing in the price range that can compete with the FX8350.
Will also make a damn cheap alternative to a server chip. Its a good sign for AMD. They are def moving in the right direction. The 7970 is confirmed to be the fastest single GPU of this generation and their cpu's are finally making head way, looking good for Steam roller.
 
Last edited:
Shucks... My CPU don't even feature on the charts anymore. Quick question, how big is the difference in performance between the 2600K and these newer processors? I haven't really been up to date with hardware in the last 5 years, so I'm really clueless.
 
ViperGTI said:
Shucks... My CPU don't even feature on the charts anymore. Quick question, how big is the difference in performance between the 2600K and these newer processors? I haven't really been up to date with hardware in the last 5 years, so I'm really clueless.
Click to expand...

2600k is still plenty fast...in fact you don't need to bother upgrading for at least 2-3 years with the current trend.
 
The Joker said:
Well its not meant to go up against the 3770k...as the 3770k is around $100 more.
As a workstation machine this chip will be fantastic, Intel offers nothing in the price range that can compete with the FX8350.
Will also make a damn cheap alternative to a server chip. Its a good sign for AMD. They are def moving in the right direction. The 7970 is confirmed to be the fastest single GPU of this generation and their cpu's are finally making head way, looking good for Steam roller.
Click to expand...

Yea Looking at intel from the pentium 4 to now it was not over night success, technology advances ( sometimes slowly) but it advances never the less.

AMD definitely doing something right this time

skyrim%201920.png


67 fps I doubt anyone would see the difference in performace vs. a Intel CPU.
 
Last edited:
Glordit said:
Yea Looking at intel from the pentium 4 to now it was not over night success, technology advances ( sometimes slowly) but it advances never the less.

AMD definitely doing something right this time

skyrim%201920.png


67 fps I doubt anyone would see the difference in performace vs. a Intel CPU.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right.
The news from around the web is also good, seems like people will forget about bulldozer and focus on current and future amd products.
 
Pr⊕phet said:
What ball?

From what I can see it is "like" performance and not ZOMG performance, or I'm looking at the wrong ones.


Random cs 1)
View attachment 3762


Random cs 2)
after%20effects.png
Click to expand...

Geez, i see what you mean. I thought that maybe my counter argument could be the pricing, but even that failed.
I couldn't find local pricing so had to look overseas and the AMD is more expensive.

Intel Core i5 2550K (slightly slower) = $242.98:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=68339

AMD FX-8350 = $264.63:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=76932
 
VegOtter said:
Geez, i see what you mean. I thought that maybe my counter argument could be the pricing, but even that failed.
I couldn't find local pricing so had to look overseas and the AMD is more expensive.

Intel Core i5 2550K (slightly slower) = $242.98:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=68339

AMD FX-8350 = $264.63:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=76932
Click to expand...

That pricing is way off, retail is $195 on the FX8350
Its just some shops trying to make a quick buck while everyone rushes to buy.
 
ViperGTI said:
Shucks... My CPU don't even feature on the charts anymore. Quick question, how big is the difference in performance between the 2600K and these newer processors? I haven't really been up to date with hardware in the last 5 years, so I'm really clueless.
Click to expand...

Well....... About that...

index.php



Im going to try get one of these processors as soon as I can. Already have a 990fx board, so All I need to do is a bios update and im good to go. <3 amd

VegOtter said:
Geez, i see what you mean. I thought that maybe my counter argument could be the pricing, but even that failed.
I couldn't find local pricing so had to look overseas and the AMD is more expensive.

Intel Core i5 2550K (slightly slower) = $242.98:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=68339

AMD FX-8350 = $264.63:
http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=76932
Click to expand...


Have a quick look at this.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html

You will notice those new intel cpu's dont even feature on the page.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top