› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

AMD FX-8350

k11keeperk11keeper Member UncommonPosts: 1,048
in Hardware

Let me just preface this with it's been a really really long time since I've built a new pc. I know the majority of people recommend intel i5 and i7s but I was curious how this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284 card would do for gaming.

I plan on using this exlusively for gaming playing ffxiv and possible archeage when it is released. If it's no good fine but if I can get 85-90% of the performance of an intel card for almost half the price I'd be willing to save a few bucks over performance.  

Comments

  • IchirokuIchiroku Member UncommonPosts: 16

    I played FFXIV with the older FX-8150 (Bulldozer, FX-8350 is Vishera) and I can play it on ultra settings. Though CPU is mostly seen as bottleneck, the other components are just as important as your CPU. With an amazing CPU and a Simple VGA you can still get horrible performance.

    TL;DR: The FX-8350 is an amazing CPU for its price and will definitely give you enough performance to play many games on high settings (Expect a lot of Ultra with a good VGA).

  • warmen_faithwarmen_faith Member Posts: 90

    I am using the same cpu, I can run pretty much everything max setting with a 7870 along side it.

    Just google some benchmarks on it, some games it out performs the i7's.

  • k11keeperk11keeper Member UncommonPosts: 1,048
    Thanks for the replies guys I think I'm going to go with this. From what you say and everything else I can find it seems dollar for dollar this is pretty much a great cpu for what I need.
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    Well, the FX-8350 is not any cheaper than a similar Intel CPU:

    Core i5 4570: $199

    You can say 8 cores vs 4 cores, but everyone in gaming realizes core count doesn't really matter (yet) - and that's why the Core i7 doesn't perform any better than the Core i5.

    So -- are you saving money? Not really. Maybe $25 on the motherboard.

    Now, if you consider the FX-6350:
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113327&Tpk=FX6350

    You lose 2 cores from the FX-8350 - but we already know that core count doesn't really matter (yet). Similar clock speeds. $60 cheaper on the CPU, about $25 cheaper on the motherboard. Now you are looking a substantial amount of money that could be meaningfully applied elsewhere.

  • k11keeperk11keeper Member UncommonPosts: 1,048
    That's an interesting point about the core count. I was aware that core count didn't really have as much of an affect on gaming as other things so it's something to consider going with to save another $60-85. I'll have to look into that cpu a bit more but your point is well taken ridelynn
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,531
    An FX-8350 can roughly hang with a Core i7-4770K in programs that scale well to eight cores.  It loses badly to even a Core i5-3570K in programs that don't scale past four cores.  But there's also the question of whether that matters, as if an AMD processor caps you at 200 frames per second while an Intel processor could have delivered 300, is that really an advantage for Intel?
  • MikehaMikeha Member EpicPosts: 9,196
    I am using the 8350 and have no complaints at all.
  • DilweedDilweed Member UncommonPosts: 222
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    An FX-8350 can roughly hang with a Core i7-4770K in programs that scale well to eight cores.  It loses badly to even a Core i5-3570K in programs that don't scale past four cores.  But there's also the question of whether that matters, as if an AMD processor caps you at 200 frames per second while an Intel processor could have delivered 300, is that really an advantage for Intel?

    You are right about a good optimized engine but if you play some indie games with their own engines every frame helps. I'm getting 25 fps right now when mass pvp happens (100+ vs 100+) with a i5-3570k and yes the cpu is the bottleneck and no I'm not running any other stuff, it happens to everybody, every frame helps.

  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,414

    There is incredibly little difference between CPUs in games. If the CPU mattered, I would look at task specific benchmarks since the task matters. If I was rendering 3D images I would use an AMD because it performs better at those tasks.

    Given today's options I would not opt for an AMD FX8350. The mobos have not been updated in a while so the platform is not as robust as modern Intel Chips. If you are looking at just games I would get the Core i5 4670 that runs about the same price as the FX8350.

    For the games you are looking at they don't use threads that well. When FFXIV was first released its performance on the AMD architecture was not that great and its probably still the same base components for rendering.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    Originally posted by Cleffy
    When FFXIV was first released its performance on the AMD architecture was not that great and its probably still the same base components for rendering.

    Nope, FFXIV is on an entirely new engine now (from the Crystal engine to the Luminous engine, both developed in-house). It runs very well on AMD CPUs, and is pretty heavily GPU dependent. The Luminous engine isn't quite as detailed as the Crystal engine was, but the small loss in detail is more than made up by lot better performing and optimization.

    All that being said, I agree with you for the most part, if your thinking about an 8350, unless you have a very specific reason for going with AMD, just go ahead and get the Core i5. If you are looking for something lower cost, however, go with the FX-6350.

Sign In or Register to comment.