• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD 8350 Faster than people would believe?

Phixsator

Phixsator

Phixsator

Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Posts
4,842
Location
Denmark
So I was going through youtube videos today and found this
. Basicly claiming with benchmarks that the 8350 is much faster than what a lot of people would claim it to be.

What do you guys think of this? as objectively as possible. My own thoughts has been that a lot of people have been talking out their behind in regards to how bad the 8350 is without really knowing anything about it. But then again youtube isn't a reliable source of information.

Im about to purchase a new system myself and I am really tempted to go with the 8350 due to price and also so I can get the freaking question answered that has been in and out of my head for a long while now.

Thoughts?
 
Well, considering games will use 2-4 threads, this will mean there are spare threads for xsplit to use, hence why it performs pretty well. But if you just game and don't bother streaming/recording then the Intel CPUs will have the upper hand. The 8350 is only very good when you're dealing with multithreaded stuff.
 
Most games don't use that many cores, an FX8350 core is lesser performance than that of an i5 core.

Doesn't take a genius to work it out.

The games that are starting to take advantage of more cores ; BF3 etc see the FX8350 as a fine contender however, but only to the point of the GPU's end performance.

Orcvader said:
Well, considering games will use 2-4 threads, this will mean there are spare threads for xsplit to use, hence why it performs pretty well. But if you just game and don't bother streaming/recording then the Intel CPUs will have the upper hand. The 8350 is only very good when you're dealing with multithreaded stuff.
Click to expand...

And this.

I thought DXTory was pretty good for recording without giving much CPU hit?
 
If I didn't have to think about the FX's woeful single threaded IPC, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one.

..but I do have to think about IPC for the stuff i use (emulators) so I wont buy one.

For PC gaming alone and apps, they've been improved enough from their original Bulldozer configuration, so as to be fine gaming CPU's.
 
Im not looking for any buy advice myself.. only opinions and thoughts on the video and the whole subject "amd s*ck boohoo".

So many people swear to Intel its almost like a cult. I have had a i7 920 for the past 4 years and its been a pleasure all the way so in no way am I a intel hater. I just feel that there are a lot of wrong info out there in regards to AMDs latest CPU performance.

Also the fact that so many reviewers are still hung up on obsoleted software like superPi for measurement is beyond me. Also most people who game are doing so at 1080p and then theres rarely any big difference between AMD and Intel when comparing price points. You would have to sell your house in order to afford something from Intel that would give AMD only dust to follow. But of course this is all my opinion and based on all the reviews i've read and the personal experience i've gathered over the years.. so its subject to fault
 
The real problem I have with Intel is that they are not pushing for improvements in instruction set utilisation. Whilst AMD CPUs have excellent features for the price (hardware virtualisation support, FMA, etc.) that only more expensive Intel CPUs support, Intel is only focusing on improving legacy performance, such as x87 and single thread. If SuperPi was rewritten to use the instructions of a modern CPU then the FX chips would give considerably more competitive performance.

Also the lack of 64 bit application performance. Even modern games like Skyrim use 32bit executables which means that they can't take advantage of 64bit registers which slows down significantly any calculations that use double sized floating point maths called by the application.
 
Last edited:
Them two in the response video were total idiots, saying if you play Skyrim your not a gamer, what an idiotic statement, but does it really matter what cpu is the "best" i'm sure people using Piledriver are still happy and people with i5/i7's im sure their happy too.
 
danny77 said:
A response to the above videos

Click to expand...

While they may have a few points during the video they seem like jack ass's to me and not very professional in their approach to prove the other guy wrong. Also again talking about being a gamer and then test games with everything at its bare minimum.. I mean wtf? what gamer would do that(unless we are talking CS 1.6 or something like that)
 
kitch9 said:
The new consoles have AMD processors with 8 threads......

AMD's time is coming with regards gaming I feel....
Click to expand...

Consoles work a fair bit differently to PCs tho, lot of things are emulated in software on a CPU core instead of having dedicated hardware, etc. so more cores get better use there than they would on the PC.
 
Phixsator said:
While they may have a few points during the video they seem like jack ass's to me and not very professional in their approach to prove the other guy wrong. Also again talking about being a gamer and then test games with everything at its bare minimum.. I mean wtf? what gamer would do that(unless we are talking CS 1.6 or something like that)
Click to expand...

Yeah the response made no sense to me, even if theres a bottle neck at high settings, gamers will be using high settings if they can, so he showed which CPU performed best in the games with the bottleneck. Sounds like a load of benchmarkers kicked off after the video and a couple of benchmarkers made this response.
 
Always unnerving to see fan-boys in the flesh, so to speak, they should remain anonymous behind the screen and keyboard, because these vids make them look twice as big a douche's than they already are.
 
Cooper said:
Always unnerving to see fan-boys in the flesh, so to speak, they should remain anonymous behind the screen and keyboard, because these vids make them look twice as big a douche's than they already are.
Click to expand...

i lol'd

AMD have a great opportunity coming up, i just hope they don't screw it.
 
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/6

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/46985-amd-fx-8350/?page=5

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_fx8350/10.htm


The only way this CPU can compete is with Multithreaded applications, even then, it doesn't win.
You can almost completely disregard Metro 2033 as it's pretty much the most GPU dependent game out there. But generally speaking, if a game uses 8 threads then it will actually perform well.

The price is great for what you get, but tbh it's not great and a lot of us buy for the best.
 
Rossi~ said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/11/06/amd-fx-8350-review/6

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/5

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/46985-amd-fx-8350/?page=5

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_fx8350/10.htm


The only way this CPU can compete is with Multithreaded applications, even then, it doesn't win.
You can almost completely disregard Metro 2033 as it's pretty much the most GPU dependent game out there. But generally speaking, if a game uses 8 threads then it will actually perform well.

The price is great for what you get, but tbh it's not great and a lot of us buy for the best.
Click to expand...

There are inconsistencies in some of those tests. If you line up anandtech and bit-tech and look at the skyrim bench and then take a look at the video card being used you have to be scratching your head. Bit-tech has awful performance on the fx 8350 and a gtx 690 in games like skyrim and yet on anandtech the fx 8350 is powering through using "only" a 680 and gets much better results. I know theres a resulotion difference between the two but the difference isn't that great to make such a big difference.

Then again we don't know where each bench is done in the game and how so I guess its all irrelevant.

As a last thing, you linked http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_fx8350/10.htm as proof for your statement yet it goes against it. Its clear that in this review they all follow eachother nicely when it comes to games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom