Impressed with FX-8350 and the new article at Anand

[grimpr]

I have to say the FX6300 and 6350 are a very compelling choice over the i3 or even a low end i5.

It leaves Core i3 in the dust, the FX6300 packs the punch of a Core i7 920, fantastic value.

 

[frozentundra123456]

The Intel Quadcore doesnt have the threads that the FX and the Core i7 have, simple as that. The extra threads in Core i7 and the FX help in disk i/o situations, from faster loading to desktop, games, multitasking etc, the chip just behaves a lot better when heavily pushed with multiple workloads running in parallel, in costrast the quadcores despite their ipc cant take it and slugginess, lag and slow responsivenes comes, you cant rely on simple cpu benchmarks to measure desktop responsiveness, its a different beast.

Well, for gaming, I would take measurably faster performance once in games to some unquantifiable impression that one cpu is faster in loading or some other hypothetical scenario.

 

[Geforce man]

You are living on impressions created by some viral marketing.
The 3570 scaling with frequency is not as good as the FX.

Do you think that an ocked 3570 would do better than an ocked
3770..?

Cool! Now post some gaming benchmarks also !

Like I said in my post, there are some areas where the 8350 is comparable ... But gaming is typically not one of them

 

[guskline]

Abwx: I note above you posted performance charts for the 3570k/3770k and the 8350 both stock and OC'd. I read the actual article you cited as the link for the charts and the reviewer admitted having a hard time OCing the 8350 more than 500Mhz without running into stability heat issues. The charts show the OCing results at either 4.5Ghz or 4.8 Ghz. I have my 8350 at 4.6Ghz solid so the 4.5Ghz figure is understandable. The 4.8Ghz OC might be more dicey as to stability.

In fairness, I question a 3770k running at 4.9Ghz without excessive heat. IDC created a great thread on delidding the 3770k to address the heat issue. My reading of that thread and my experience with my own 3770k (not delidded) is that a 4.9Ghz setting would require a vcore mod and excessive heat.

Bottom line? The OC figures for the 8350 and 3770k might be correct but are they stable? The author of the article admitted the 8350 appears better than the 3570k in heavy multi-thread apps but is not as strong for gaming. Having both the 3770k and the 8350 I find the 3770k better in both areas. No knock on the 8350. For it's price point it's a good chip. SO ... if you are a gamer first and run a few multi-thread apps from time to time I would say the 3570k gets the nod over the 8350. If multi-thread apps are your focus with occasional gaming the 8350 would get my nod over the 3570k. If you have more $$$ or live near a MicroCenter like I do problem is solved. Get a 3770k!

 

[Abwx]

Gusk , the point was to show that the the 3570 , when looking at its perfs in theses chart we clearly see that even overclocked at 4.5gHZ it wont beat an equivalently clocked 8350 , just make an iteration with 100% scaling.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Abwx: I note above you posted performance charts for the 3570k/3770k and the 8350 both stock and OC'd. I read the actual article you cited as the link for the charts and the reviewer admitted having a hard time OCing the 8350 more than 500Mhz without running into stability heat issues. The charts show the OCing results at either 4.5Ghz or 4.8 Ghz. I have my 8350 at 4.6Ghz solid so the 4.5Ghz figure is understandable. The 4.8Ghz OC might be more dicey as to stability.

In fairness, I question a 3770k running at 4.9Ghz without excessive heat. IDC created a great thread on delidding the 3770k to address the heat issue. My reading of that thread and my experience with my own 3770k (not delidded) is that a 4.9Ghz setting would require a vcore mod and excessive heat.

Bottom line? The OC figures for the 8350 and 3770k might be correct but are they stable? The author of the article admitted the 8350 appears better than the 3570k in heavy multi-thread apps but is not as strong for gaming. Having both the 3770k and the 8350 I find the 3770k better in both areas. No knock on the 8350. For it's price point it's a good chip. SO ... if you are a gamer first and run a few multi-thread apps from time to time I would say the 3570k gets the nod over the 8350. If multi-thread apps are your focus with occasional gaming the 8350 would get my nod over the 3570k. If you have more $$$ or live near a MicroCenter like I do problem is solved. Get a 3770k!

Gus, I agree with your assesment. I do have to point out however that the "benchmarks" posted by Abwx are only 2 cherry picked ones that most favor AMD, and include no gaming benchmarks. So while I agree with your conclsions, I would question Abwx's statement that an 8350 at 4.5ghz is faster overall than a 3570k overclocked to the same speed. I most definitely think that at the same clock, the 3570k is faster in gaming.

 

[guskline]

In the sort time I had my 2500k @4.5Ghz, later to be replaced by my 3770k it was as fast as the 8350 at 4.6Ghz if not slightly faster in games. What I will say is that the 2500k had a noticeable lead on the 8150, which was replaced by the 8350. The 8350 really closed the gap. I know my 3770k is faster in gaming. Based upon my knowledge of my 2500k and knowing that at the same clock speed the 3570k is slighly faster, I find it hard to believe that the 8350 is faster than the 3570k in most games. Wtih newer games coming out that might be coded for multi core perhaps the 8350 might forge ahead of the 3570k by a wee bit, though doubtful.

BTW I'm speaking of gaming not overall benchmarking.

 

[grimpr]

Well, for gaming, I would take measurably faster performance once in games to some unquantifiable impression that one cpu is faster in loading or some other hypothetical scenario.

Good for you, take the Intel quadcore and be done with it, for the rest of us who would like to play decently all the modern games and have the multithreaded crunch of the Core i7 2600 in desktop apps, we like our 8350s.

Hypothetical on your negative and hypocritical stance, why dont you ask around bgt or guskline to tell you the truth that you're clearly on purprose seem to be missing?

 

[myocardia]

Abwx: I note above you posted performance charts for the 3570k/3770k and the 8350 both stock and OC'd. I read the actual article you cited as the link for the charts and the reviewer admitted having a hard time OCing the 8350 more than 500Mhz without running into stability heat issues. The charts show the OCing results at either 4.5Ghz or 4.8 Ghz. I have my 8350 at 4.6Ghz solid so the 4.5Ghz figure is understandable. The 4.8Ghz OC might be more dicey as to stability.

In fairness, I question a 3770k running at 4.9Ghz without excessive heat. IDC created a great thread on delidding the 3770k to address the heat issue. My reading of that thread and my experience with my own 3770k (not delidded) is that a 4.9Ghz setting would require a vcore mod and excessive heat.

Bottom line? The OC figures for the 8350 and 3770k might be correct but are they stable? The author of the article admitted the 8350 appears better than the 3570k in heavy multi-thread apps but is not as strong for gaming. Having both the 3770k and the 8350 I find the 3770k better in both areas. No knock on the 8350. For it's price point it's a good chip. SO ... if you are a gamer first and run a few multi-thread apps from time to time I would say the 3570k gets the nod over the 8350. If multi-thread apps are your focus with occasional gaming the 8350 would get my nod over the 3570k. If you have more $$$ or live near a MicroCenter like I do problem is solved. Get a 3770k!

Good for you, take the Intel quadcore and be done with it, for the rest of us who would like to play decently all the modern games and have the multithreaded crunch of the Core i7 2600 in desktop apps, we like our 8350s.

Hypothetical on your negative and hypocritical stance, why dont you ask around bgt or guskline to tell you the truth that you're clearly on purprose seem to be missing?

/thread

 

[frozentundra123456]

Good for you, take the Intel quadcore and be done with it, for the rest of us who would like to play decently all the modern games and have the multithreaded crunch of the Core i7 2600 in desktop apps, we like our 8350s.

Hypothetical on your negative and hypocritical stance, why dont you ask around bgt or guskline to tell you the truth that you're clearly on purprose seem to be missing?

If you like the 8350, fine. It is a perfectly good processor.

As to your last sentence, it makes no sense grammatically or logically. I work in a research environment, and so far we have not been able to get any papers published without objective data. Sure it would be nice to be able to say "oh yea, the drug we are studying works great, because it seems like it to me". Unfortunately we would be the laughingstock of the scientific community.

Solid data trumps undocumented observations every time.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If this forum were tasked with the goal or expectation of actually accomplishing something materially significant to life then we might find the motivation and justification to take such action.

As no one's life or livelihood depends on the signal-to-noise ratio of this particular forum, it is a hard sell to argue that the threshold for unacceptable noise be drawn in the sand this side of some of the amusing and entertaining members of the community.

And speaking of amusing and entertaining, better to dance with the devil you know than the devil you don't.

Nature abhors a vacuum, and a public forum abhors a dearth of nonsensical fanbois. Remove them as fast as you like, nature will just make more to fill the void.

I guess you have to extend "buyer beware" to "reader beware" in a forum.
I do feel that a new reader could get incorrect or biased information from certain posts in these forums, however. That is unfortunate, but I guess it is the responsibility of a poster/reader to also find objective data from review sites as well.

 

[Abwx]

Gus, I agree with your assesment. I do have to point out however that the "benchmarks" posted by Abwx are only 2 cherry picked ones that most favor AMD, and include no gaming benchmarks. So while I agree with your conclsions, I would question Abwx's statement that an 8350 at 4.5ghz is faster overall than a 3570k overclocked to the same speed. I most definitely think that at the same clock, the 3570k is faster in gaming.

It was the only ocked results published by TR so there s
no cherry picking , other bench of their review point to
the same tendency , that the i3570 is no match for the FX8350.

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed

The same that advised i3s rather than FX4XXX last year are
doing the same mistake , just double the core number....and
the number of mistakes.

 

[frozentundra123456]

It was the only ocked results published by TR so there s
no cherry picking , other bench of their review point to
the same tendency , that the i3570 is no match for the FX8350.

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed

The same that advised i3s rather than FX4XXX last year are
doing the same mistake , just double the core number....and
the number of mistakes.

i5 wins or ties every gaming benchmark while trading blows in productivity benchmarks, seems like more than a match for 8350 to me, depending on your use pattern.

 

[Sleepingforest]

It was the only ocked results published by TR so there s
no cherry picking , other bench of their review point to
the same tendency , that the i3570 is no match for the FX8350.

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed

The same that advised i3s rather than FX4XXX last year are
doing the same mistake , just double the core number....and
the number of mistakes.

Did you even read the conclusion? That's not what they said at all. They said (emphasis added):

the FX-8350 outperforms both the Core i5-3470 and the 3570K in our nicely multithreaded test suite...

Pop over to the gaming scatter, though, and the picture changes dramatically. There, the FX-8350 is the highest-performance AMD desktop processor to date for gaming, finally toppling the venerable Phenom II X4 980. Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350.

 

[bgt]

Strange...my 3770K does not beat my FX8350 in games using the same 7950-OC'ed graphic card?
last game played: TR
Unigine Heaven/Valley speed test

 

[Abwx]

i5 wins or ties every gaming benchmark while trading blows in productivity benchmarks, seems like more than a match for 8350 to me, depending on your use pattern.

Granted the i5xxx is better in game in these tests we can
still confidently assume that it will be no more the case
later this year , just look at the games that were recently
updated.

Did you even read the conclusion? That's not what they said at all. They said (emphasis added):

Six month later this review conclusion is already obsolete
and it will be even more in the next same time frame ,
and i m talking of games...

 

[Abwx]

I know it is a moot point to some, but don't forget the energy prices here in Europe! I pay like 0,25

Not all Europe , i m in france and paying about 0.1 euro/KWh...

 

[crashtech]

France has a great nuclear powered electrical grid.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Granted the i5xxx is better in game in these tests we can
still confidently assume that it will be no more the case
later this year , just look at the games that were recently
updated.



Six month later this review conclusion is already obsolete
and it will be even more in the next same time frame ,
and i m talking of games...

Crysis 3 is the only game I know that performs better on 8350, and that is only in some benchmarks. Other test sites have shown low end i5 equal to 8350 with higher minimum framerates. FC3 also showed some advantage to 8350, but the Blood Dragon appears much faster on intel.

You can assume anything you want, but that does not mean it will happen. There will probably be some games in which this will occur, but there probably will also be a good number of games that will still depend more on high IPC than just number of cores. Metro Last Light for instance is a brand new game in which the 3570 outperforms the 8350.

 

[Montosaurous]

Not a bad chip, just a bit lacking behind Intel's similarly priced offers, sorta like how Thuban was with Sandy Bridge.

 

[galego]

i5 wins or ties every gaming benchmark

And none is optimized for more than 4 cores. E.g. Crysis 3 only loads two cores of the FX-8350 up to 90%, whereas four of the remaining cores are loaded to only 60%. Between 1/3 and 1/4 of the 8-core chip remain unused by the game engine, whereas all cores of the 4 core chips are loaded above the 90%.

Future games will be more heavily multitreaded and will exploit the true performance of chips like the FX-8350.

 

[guskline]

galego, your computer specs please?

 

[toyota]

that slide right there is 100% bullshit. for one thing a plain gtx660 cannot get 70 fps in that game on max settings no matter what cpu is used.

 

[SPBHM]

And none is optimized for more than 4 cores. E.g. Crysis 3 only loads two cores of the FX-8350 up to 90%, whereas four of the remaining cores are loaded to only 60%. Between 1/3 and 1/4 of the 8-core chip remain unused by the game engine, whereas all cores of the 4 core chips are loaded above the 90%.

Future games will be more heavily multitreaded and will exploit the true performance of chips like the FX-8350.

newest BF3 test I can find

newest C3 test I can find

let's hope future games see no benefit in faster cores, just more cores...

 

[frozentundra123456]

And none is optimized for more than 4 cores. E.g. Crysis 3 only loads two cores of the FX-8350 up to 90%, whereas four of the remaining cores are loaded to only 60%. Between 1/3 and 1/4 of the 8-core chip remain unused by the game engine, whereas all cores of the 4 core chips are loaded above the 90%.
Future games will be more heavily multitreaded and will exploit the true performance of chips like the FX-8350.

I was referring to the games listed in the article quoted by abwx.
I do hope that you don't seriously consider fritz chess benchmark a game.
Most of the other games you listed are gpu limited, and some didn't even test 3570k, but a lower end i5.