My impressions owning both the FX8350 and now the 3770k.

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
I'm downsizing from 4 computers to 2. One to remain is my FX8350 at 4.6Ghz(21x219) on my Asus Sabertooth Rev Mb. cooled with a Corsair H100 with 16G of DDR3 and a GTX680.

I have 2 I5-2500k rigs and will be parting out both 2500ks and decided to keep the Asus P8Z68-V Pro Gen 3 mb and sell the AsRock Z68Extreme mb. A quick run to the MicroCenter in Philly this past Monday resulted in me buying the coveted I7-3770k for their price of $229.99 (Tax brought ther price to @$244). I swapped out the 2500k (now for sale see for sale forum) and installed the 3770k and OC'd it to 4.4Ghz (44x100) I have 16G DDR3 1866 ram, 2 EVGA GTX670 FTWs in SLI. CPU cooling is a ThermalTake Water 2.0 Pro.

I have written extensively about the FX8350 and how it is a decent chip that is close to the 2500k. Frankly the 3770k is in another league.

I have seen some charts where the FX8350 appears to be close to the 3770k. If you read the "fine print" it is an OC'd 8350 at @4.6Ghz. Trust me, if you OC the 3770k to 4.4Ghz like I have it is FASTER. PERIOD.

This is not meant to bash the FX8350. Having both rigs to compare, the 3770k is faster. Experiencing it first hand is truly a treat. I'll keep you posted.
 

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
I'll grab the Jiffy Pop. There's going be enough heat in this thread to make several batches :)
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
I'll grab the Jiffy Pop. There's going be enough heat in this thread to make several batches :)
I hear you friend. I see alot of posters on either side of the fence but most opinions are based on what they read or hear from others, not their owning both cpus.
Our Moderator, Idontcare, owns both the AMD FX8350 AND the Intel I7-3770k. Ask him if my impressions are incorrect.;)
 
Last edited:

AnandThenMan

Diamond Member
Nov 11, 2004
3,985
615
126
Intel has a faster processor which usually costs $130 more. Wow, this is thread worthy. :p
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
Intel has a faster processor which usually costs $130 more. Wow, this is thread worthy. :p
Not if you are near a Microcenter. Newegg has the FX8350 on sale for $189.99 with promo cade so the difference is $40.
 
Last edited:

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
For what I used my 3770k with, I cannot tell the difference between the 3770k and 3570k at all. I switched back and I got a cooler running chip too. Win-win.
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
For what I used my 3770k with, I cannot tell the difference between the 3770k and 3570k at all. I switched back and I got a cooler running chip too. Win-win.
Revenger, you will soon "feel the heat" of the Bulldozer 8150!:cool::p
 

Ketchup

Elite Member
Sep 1, 2002
14,558
248
106
Usually these threads go south when AMD lifers start making ridiculous and or irrelevant claims.

AMD is just not in it for CPUs. Period. I have had AMDs in the past. They were great chips. But today, I don't see any reason to buy one in order to save $20 on a computer that should last me several years.
 

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
Not a troll thread. I did buy his 8150.

Hey Guskline, I felt the heat on my FX6100 so I guess I can probably turn my furnace off after I get this chip eh?
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
For what I used my 3770k with, I cannot tell the difference between the 3770k and 3570k at all. I switched back and I got a cooler running chip too. Win-win.

Thats because the extra HT threads of the i7 were *parked* all the time making it essential a quadcore chip for your workloads, not a single difference compared to the i5. Core i7s are great and powerful and the extra HT threads are useful for many things, disk i/o for example, but the price difference is big compared to Core i5s and AMDs FX line, for me they are not worth it, that money be better spent on a fatter and faster SSD or a better VGA.
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
26,693
15,747
136
I hear you friend. I see alot of posters on either side of the fence but most opinions are based on what they read or hear from others, not their owning both cpus.
Our Moderator, Idontcare, owns both the AMD FX8350 AND the Intel I7-3770k. Ask him if my impressions are incorrect.;)

Wow... I know Idontcare is an administrator, but I used to be the primary CPU moderator. I guess I have been impeached. :)
 

Rvenger

Elite Member <br> Super Moderator <br> Video Cards
Apr 6, 2004
6,283
5
81
Wow... I know Idontcare is an administrator, but I used to be the primary CPU moderator. I guess I have been impeached. :)


Hey Mark, long time no see, how ya been?




Thats because the extra HT threads of the i7 were *parked* all the time making it essential a quadcore chip for your workloads, not a single difference compared to the i5. Core i7s are great and powerful and the extra HT threads are useful for many things, disk i/o for example, but the price difference is big compared to Core i5s and AMDs FX line, for me they are not worth it, that money be better spent on a fatter and faster SSD or a better VGA.

Im quite sure I used all the threads in BF3 and when using FLStudio. I can see the difference in numbers just not in my eyes is what I am trying to say I guess. I am also able to get higher clocks than my 3770k which helps a little too.
 
Last edited:

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
Im quite sure I used all the threads in BF3 and when using FLStudio. I can see the difference in numbers just not in my eyes is what I am trying to say I guess. I am also able to get higher clocks than my 3770k which helps a little too.

Well the extra threads help make for a much smoother experience, used for loading textures/data from the ssd etc. in parallel with the game, bf 3, far cry 3 and crysis 3 use this trick and in the future many more, the difference between the Core i5 and Core i7s lives in the laters capability due to its HT threads to multitask and cope well with many parallel working programs and workloads, the system is much more responsive with the i7s and feels alive, very rarely bogs down to heavy usage, its a true multitaskers chip, in the same vein are the 8core FXs from AMD, they are much more resilient to multitasking than quadcores, they dont put out great numbers in single threaded programs but they excel in running multiple concurrent programs with ease, they are in Core i7 class in this scenario for me.
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
Tek Syndicate video in 3....2....1....

Very funny but its the truth, and the truth is showcased clearly in Linux. Try running an 8core FX in latest distros or better yet, install Gentoo and compile it to AMDs architecture using latest GCC compiler, benchmark the system and get ready for a surprise.
 

2is

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2012
4,281
131
106
Very funny but its the truth, and the truth is showcased clearly in Linux. Try running an 8core FX in latest distros or better yet, install Gentoo and compile it to AMDs architecture using latest GCC compiler, benchmark the system and get ready for a surprise.

Having to go through that much effort and use an OS no one uses to showcase AMDs strengths isn't surprising. It's expected.

Ill stick with the CPU that performs better in everything people actually do. :)
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
Having to go through that much effort and use an OS no one uses to showcase AMDs strengths isn't surprising. It's expected.

Ill stick with the CPU that performs better in everything people actually do. :)

So Linux is an OS noone uses, very funny, congrats, maybe you should check around in places like http://openbenchmarking.org/. I wont go into derailing the thread further, made my points clear, Core i7s are great chips but they arent worth the extra 100$ in price compared to Core i5s and AMDs FX that goes globally and not in Microcenters in US, this money is better spends on a faster and fatter SSD that makes a REAL difference or a faster and fatter VGA card for the gamer, common sense.
 

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,836
218
106
FX 8350 cannot touch a i7 3770k overall. Very few benchs will show the FX beating the i7 for a small margin. Congrats on the purchase, it's an amazing cpu. I'm waiting for the 4770k or whatever name they put on it
 

SithSolo1

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2001
7,740
11
81
Not if you are near a Microcenter. Newegg has the FX8350 on sale for $189.99 with promo cade so the difference is $40.

Well to be fair, the 3770k is $229.... and the 8350 is only $169, both at MicroCenter. The 8320 for $139 is probably a better deal than both though if you are okay with "not the best but still pretty good and on a tight budget".
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
Guskline, i would had seeked out an 2600/2700k instead of the IB i7, the thermals are much better on SB and are worth more in perceived value of the chip, at least to me, than the extra performance of the IB core.
 

Gikaseixas

Platinum Member
Jul 1, 2004
2,836
218
106
Well to be fair, the 3770k is $229.... and the 8350 is only $169, both at MicroCenter. The 8320 for $139 is probably a better deal than both though if you are okay with "not the best but still pretty good and on a tight budget".

This is a valid point. Since i'm not near a MC now the FX was a much better buy for me. The delta is even larger pricewise
 

Sleepingforest

Platinum Member
Nov 18, 2012
2,375
0
76
So Linux is an OS noone uses, very funny, congrats, maybe you should check around in places like http://openbenchmarking.org/. I wont go into derailing the thread further, made my points clear, Core i7s are great chips but they arent worth the extra 100$ in price compared to Core i5s and AMDs FX that goes globally and not in Microcenters in US, this money is better spends on a faster and fatter SSD that makes a REAL difference or a faster and fatter VGA card for the gamer, common sense.

Err... 91.62% of people connected to the internet with a full-OS PC (laptop, desktop) used Windows, as seen here. Only 1.21% of people used Linux. I'd say that Linux is pretty insignificant in comparison.

But I do agree on the other points. Purely for gaming, an i5 or possibly the FX-8320 from Microcenter (I mean, close to stock i5 for $140? Count me in!) are the best deals. And for the average user, an SSD would definitely be a better choice than going i7.
 
Last edited: