From back then to now Running an AMD FX8530 @4.4Ghz / 32GB DDR3 @ 1800 / All SandDisk Extreme SSDs / RX6600M Playing overwatch 2 and Diablo4 on max settings / and G()d of War on Medium - long term it was been amazing!
I ran an FX-8350 for 7 years until I finally upgraded. It's still in use hooked up to the TV for my kids to play games on. Paired with a GTX 1080 it does just fine to this day.
my only complain for the Fx8350 as a sec. build is the power consumption... you can get away with a 1st gen Ryzen 1600 in a cheap a320 mobo for just a little more money than the Fx, and will draw 1/2 the power and produce way less heat
I ran nearly the same CPU, the FX 8320, until about 2015, and at the time, I was extremely happy with it, especially considering what it cost. I knew it wasn't faster than its Intel rivals, but it was still plenty fast enough for the gaming and productivity tasks I was up to at the time. Fond memories of this much maligned low point in AMD's history.
@@sk8420_ That's the one that was architecturally the same, but clocked really high right? Did you ever run one? I remember the VRMs on my board being my major obstacle to overclocking the 8320.
@@SoulZZ5545Someone I know got it to run Baldur's Gate 3 at playable FPS. He did have to upgrade from that 2GB GTX960 to something with 4GB+ of VRAM and actually put a SSD in the system, but it worked out in the end.
My FX-8350 is still in active service as my backup desktop PC that also serves as entertainment PC, have it connected to a projector in a small living room and play some movies with it every now and then, paired it with a GTX 1060 6GB, thing can run The Division 2 on medium settings just fine, it's not a great CPU of its time but it's still got some life in it even as a gaming PC.
Running my 10-year old gaming rig on this very same processor! It's served me well (completely stock), and no wonder I needed to upgrade my PSU early in its life. Upgrade planning underway!
I remember buying an Athlon X4 860K for my first ever gaming PC while my friends had the spare money for FX 8350/8370 CPUs. It wasn't bad for what I played at the time being paired with an R7 270X my coworker sold me for $50 (this was back in 2016). I think about these old architectures from time to time and it makes me happy people still make videos about them occasionally.
@@DrEvilTag That's freaking awesome! When I bought the processor I believe it was only $80 on Amazon so it was super easy for me to be able to afford. Unfortunately through rough times and where I am now, I haven't really left that era of PC parts as I currently have an Eluktronics laptop with an i7 6700HQ and GTX 1060. It's getting me by though for what I currently play :) Maybe I'll get an upgrade later down the road somewhere.
I'm still running this processor on a budget build I built in 2016. I'm here to see see if it's still worth a damn. It has served me well for a good while now.
I bought my fx 8350 back in 2016 It was a good choice and it was on sale. I don't regret buying it and it still works fine 40-60 fps in games like warzone, rdr2 on high etc
I got one of these FX8350, I used it for gaming ever since the release until just a year ago when the motherboard started having issues with warping resulting in overheating VRM. I then a support bracket for it and made it a testing rig instead. I always ran mine at 4,6GHZ as my chip had two unstable cores above that and it was paired with 32GB ram that I overclock timings on to very tight speeds and I later had my GTX1080 Extreme edition also really high clocked (2050Mhz) I had very good performance in pretty much any game over it´s life span, I even managed to get top rankings with similar platforms on 3Dmark with my stuff. it was a hot system but very decent for almost 10 years of usage.
Im using a fx8300 @ 3,5ghz stil. Honestly I cannot tell you when I will buy other PC. Cause It does what I want. I play everything. For the price, FX was my best purchase.
@@D_Webb Now I dont play Alan Wake II only. And I wont play it. With FX I play all games I want. The question is: Core i 2nd and 3rd was more expensive than FX. Can the people that bought it play all games in the world? Answer: no! This is the answer.
@@opinadorrj4337 for the price of an Fx 8 core you could get a locked i5 of the low tier, which was insane sin Fx 8300 blasted away the i5 in multitasking, could beat them in almost any productivity task and despite loosing in some games (in the "fps insane race" in which some "CPU" is the winner by 4 more average fps on a cleant test PC) still fx could game just fine. That being said, its 2024... all the entire AM4 socked passed by at this point and we are on the 2nd/3rd AM5 socket generation... To say that an Fx cpu holds might be true up until you start doing things with the Fx8350 CPU and then try to do these same things with an R7 5700x (like the jump i made in my case). Then you realize how much slower really is and how far away from current standars really is, since 5700x is an average "trade of all jacks" CPU, good at everything at a low TDP but not an extreme gaming CPU nor productivity oriented processor
83xx handles many games just fine, esp before 2016. Meanwhile, some newer games can utilize all the threads of the 83xx and still be playable. I had my 8350 tweaked & overclocked with FSB(HTT) & ram @ 2200mhz on a 990FXA board (with APM & C&C turned off) -- this literally gave me 15%+ more performance -- sometimes it seemed like even more than that because it really helped diminish the stuttering & 1% lows. The cpu will be bottlenecked by the 3080, but you can always transfer the card to another build when ready. With the combo you have now, you can crank up the render resolution with no loss in performance. When I was still using my 8350, I ran many games @ 1800p / 2560p (4k) -- some newer games like BL3/wonderlands ran pretty well. With the overclock, i'd get around 80 FPS with dips in the mid 60s -- without the overlock (or overclocking with just the multiplier) FPS would be more in the 60s with dips in the mid 40s. It really depends on what you do & the games you play. When it comes to web browsing/mutlitasking/general use, 83xx can seem nearly as snappy as something much newer. A well optimized 83xx can outperform a stock 9590, even @ a few hundred mhz less.
I found this video very interesting and very fun to watch. One thing i wish you could analyze at some point is how the FX-8350 compares against simular processors from the time period in multi-tasking activities and multi threaded usage in games. I heard that in games that utilize more than 4 cores, the FX processor tends to do a pretty good job on the 1% and .1% lows compared with 4 core/8 threaded CPUs like the i7. They tend to have a much smoother frame time and less stutter in games (at least in other comparisons i watched). I look forward to see you do this test. The FX processors didn't age so badly as some people think.
I liked the FX line, I had a few FX chips over the years, I daily drove a FX8320, I like FX not due to its performance, it was not great, but the fun I had with it, overclocking, forced me to learn more about it due to ya know not being faster than Intel's offerings, plus they undervolt like crazy. So at a cheap price point at the time, I would say it was worth it, If I had less bills I had to worry about, sure I would of went Intel, but I also probably never cared to tweak the living crap out of the thing.
Totally agree currently running an undervolted FX8350 myself and it cut its electricity usage down from 120 watts to 86 watts and lowered its temperature by 11 degrees celsius on full load and 9 on stock so definitely worth it. Managed a -0.18 voltage offset on it and that is with a 970 gaming pro carbon board from MSI.
my Mashine is still alive AMD FX8385 with a RX560 8gb graca and 32 gb RAM, i am still happy with it, most time i use it for my HomeOffice, sometimes i play some games, and the most games are running fine
So glad you came out with this vid! I really enjoy seeing the frame rates compare between generations. And what a beast the recent 5600x is compared with the top cpu's of only a few years ago. Anyway, I have about 20 or so boxes running at the house here, mostly on Linux, but I have a fetish for the fx8350. I think it was because it was my first real foray into overclocking. And then water cooling. And then more about thermal behavior. The 8350 was the gateway drug for me. It shouldn't sell for as much as it does in various places, but it's kind of like a classic z28 or Ford Mustang or something. They don't compare with current generations, but people still love them. That's the fx8350 for me.
I used to run FX8320 Piledriver on a Asus 99x motherboard with 16gb ram at 1600MHz and a GTX 660 in 2012 after 5 years I upgraded the ram to 32gb and 1866 mhz and the gpu to gtx 770. now I run a r7 3700x, 32gb at 3200mhz with a rtx 3070 on a msi 570x, both cpus were watercooled with AIO the 8320 on a 120mm rad and the 3700x on a 320mm rad
I had an FX 8350 on the same ROG crosshair with 16gb of 2400mhz hyperX savage kit running a small OC to 4.7ghz on an Ev0 212 with many gpu's from a 750ti up to a 5700xt and it handled everything i threw it it.. gaming and basic video editing. Had it since the release and only upgraded last April as the board started to randomly drop usb connections.. so.. around 11 years without a problem and although i will admit i am bias towards the Fx i personally think it was a decent work horse that does not deserve the abuse it gets.. Yes was slower than a 2700k.. and yes it was hot.. and power mad.. but as i said.. it did eveything i asked of it and if the board had not popped i would still be using it.. The maddest part is i sold the board as faulty and still got £30.. + the £35 for the cpu and peobably would have prefered to get another Croshair but working examples are still selling for more than a B550 haha.. Loved it and would buy again as a retro XP pc if the prices come down in the future.
My son got my old rig... FX-8350 + 1060 6gb. Still running most of the games just fine. I'm gonna buy a 7800xt this year and then my old rig will receive the last upgrade of it's lifetime, a rx6600xt. I got it this CPU on sale back in 2013.
They have aged really well. But the IPC is still horrible unless you overclock the NB to 2600, HT to 2400+ and the cores to 4.5 or so - they basically don't scale with some all core overclock at all. Those are all very doable on reasonable voltages and allow you to maximize 2400 DDR3 with ideally with the lowest timings you can do and tuned sub timings too. 1600CL9 just doesn't do it any justice. Set up like I said, you'll outperform a stock i7 4770 with 1600CL9 memory in most scenarios - say in an old office PC.
Almost. You still won't get the same single core IPC. It ranks about an i5 2400/2500 in that arena. It def does do 4770 multi core IPC which is amazing. Edit: @b0ne91 's comment is correct in that you want to OC the HT and NB to those exact numbers. You can get more if you push but those are stable numbers. I'm running 16GB DDR3 2133 G.Skill Sniper RAM with NB to 2600 and HT to 2400. And i'm running my chip at 4.7 ghz for stability purposes. It can run 5.2 but I do not have a water cooler for it so there's no reason to do that at all. I'm running on a Cryorig H7.
far from it. it will not outperform the haswell i7. At best it may hold up to and beat sandybridge i5 in some things. I still have the FX 8350 (retired in a box somewhere) - I know all the tricks.. it will not beat even a stock sandy i7 in gaming.. FX will only get similar performance to a haswell i7 in video rendering and other applications that can use all threads. Everything else the stock i7 will be clearly ahead of the OC FX while consuming far less power.
@@ProcessedDigitally If you actually overclock it like I said, it will outperform the i7 4770 on 1600C9 RAM in most modern games. Haswell has far superior single core IPC. I'm not suggesting that the FX8350 is the better choice - it's terrible for a variety of reasons. Just that the test scenario here isn't great because just dumping a bunch of voltage and overclocking the core which was NEVER the bottleneck with these in the first place doesn't do anything. Overclocking cache/memory controller is where it's at. You're wasting thermal headroom by putting more than 1.4V into the cores and going above 4.5Ghz unless you have a 360mm AIO.
@@Trick-Framed Yes and no. It will never even get close to an i5 4440 in a synthetic single core benchmark. But the reality is that games don't scale that way and single core IPC was never the bottleneck with these CPUs. They're memory/cache starved, especially because it's shared. That's why you don't waste your thermal headroom by dumping a bunch of voltage into cores and take them to 4.8Ghz - it's. waste. Settle for 1.4V and 4.5Ghz and put however much you can into RAM, Northbridge and Hypertransfer. Especially RAM and NB scale really well - double so in games.
My mother board die on my AMD 5600x and had to use my AMD FX-8300 for two weeks last month..I had not use that PC for 3 years, now it did just fine for work with windows 10, yes it was slower but it got me by, until my other PC motherboard came in was up runing again... So I keeep mine around just in case... I still Like it can still be used for work if need be...
Hello. Interesting benches with "modern" games. I used my FX8350 for 5 years (from 2012 to 2017) and my father is still using it nowadays, so for more than a decade now, doing gaming and encodings. I never could overclock it more than 4650MHz before reaching temperature problems, but that was more that 10% from the stock frequency so I was rather happy. I think I had 1866MHz RAM, though. It's strange you couldn't pass 1600MHz, but my memory is fuzzy. I never really though I was CPU limited. And you demonstrated here that, on some games, it is still capable to deliver an OK experience. Thank you for this video.
It actually age well compare to newer Intel Pentium G4400 released in 2015. It's a 2c 2t Skylake based CPU. Even though it beats the FX-8350 in single core. G4400 would perform horribly in games that uses more than 2 cores like Valorant. It's a funny story how I discover that. I tested FX-8350 with GTX 580 and 4GB at DDR3-2000 CL8 or CL7 (2x2 config very rare Hynix DDR3 that is made in USA It could run same timings as DDR2-800 ram at 1333) on Valorant. My expectation is it will would run pretty bad then I was surprise to see it hit like 140+ fps and peak 190 fps So instead of giving the FX-8350 I gave the G4400 to my niece who wanted to play Valorant and I even gave her the newer RX 550 with up to date drivers and with 16GBs of DDR4-2400 ram. I'm thinking that G4400 would easily run that game because it would score like 700+ pts while FX-8350 would score like 480 pts on Geekbench5 at the time. Then she complain to me why the game is so slow. After looking at what she was doing. She was trying to play like Spotify and had like websites in the background. I decided to test it a few times with out those. and later had to limit the FPS to 45. Game could run like 80+ fps but lag spike became worse. It was not smooth at all. Now I realize 2c 2t is a bit outdated. lol
@@vanguard812-vf7hr2 cores 4 threads is useful for a router or a nas but not for much else. Sure, you can try it, some older games will run well, but anything new will not run well on 2c2t anymore. Nothing to do with memory, GPU or anything else you mentioned. It is a pure CPU bottleneck. Even with an RX 550. Giving her the FX might have solved a few problems but keeping the platform stable is something for an enthusiast. When well tuned you can run multiple apps and a game like Valorant at the same time. But you need to be able to tune memory, NB and HT in order to get the most from it.
The thing thats really interesting to me about bulldozer and namely the 8 core SKUs is just how much can be gained out of OCing on the platform. Obviously over a decade old this point and no reason to use over any recent low end offering. Yet you can still wring quite a bit of life out of an 83XX chip by doing 4.6 Or up, all core, paired with 2400mhz DDR3. I have an 8320 around that does 5ghz 1.4675v and the difference in ST perf is crazy compared against a stock 83XX. OCing completely smoothes out the hitching that normally ia experienced on a stock 8350 in newer games.
@@TheGuruStud I missed out on the entirety of vishera and really the entire AMD slump leading up to ryzen. I adopted bulldozer when it launched but ended up selling my 8150 + 2x GTX 580 3gb amp2's build to my brother all but 4-5 months after switching to AM3+ so i never really got to fully enjoy the MT perf at the time outside of 3d rendering & video editing since games still scaled terribly at the time outside of single/dual core perf. Didnt end up coming back to custom pc as a hobby till 2018. So i dodged the bulk of the 4c-8t + 5-10% ipc gain every gen stagnation period. From 2018 onwards ive gotten to go back and enjoy vishera/sandy bridge/haswell/skylake etc etc through collecting & overclocking as a hobby but its still not the same as enjoying a product throughout its active lifespan and watching how it interacts with the software released when it is still newer hardware. But all and all bulldozer really didnt age super poorly for what it was. Where it had faults in being super cache starved it made up for being a strong overclocker thanks to its long pipeline design. I think had the circumstances been different and had i kept my system + stayed in the hobby. im sure i would have been happy with 990fx and am3+ as a platform for quite awhile.
They needed to. I built my first desktop during Haswell and nobody even considered AMD unless you were building a $500 PC. And it's not like I was untrusting, I had grown up seeing both Intel and AMD branding on PC stuff
@@cosmic_gate476 True. I remember so many console killer PCs during that time on youtube back in the day featuring FX 4xxx or FX 6xxx. They were cheaper but power hungry. I chose Intel at that time as my Dad wasn't familiar with AMD and he wanted to stick to a brand he knows.
Still own an FX-6300 machine. Always have been happy with it considering upgrade from C2Q6600 and at the bottom of the barrel price in which I paid with it. Speaking of price I have always had Older AMD processors sell for far more than their Intel counter parts. It comes down to supply. So many more Intel processors were sold and exist so they are usually cheap.
i still have mine, fx 8350 on a asus tuf mobo, using 295x2 gpu. just rebuilt it in new case. took stock rad off of gpu and put a 120 and repasted new sil pads. use it for daily tasking.
my fx 9590 was scoring over 900 single in cinebench my ram was at 2400 mhz at cl 9 with that same board . i was trading blows with first gen ryzen 1400 and 1500 . 5.4 ghz that cpu screamed
Thanks for the video, I always like a look back at the FX chips. I've had 2 FX 8350s. I only overclocked them to 4.5Ghz and 4.7Ghz. In older games they would get 70-100fps so would be a great pairing for a budget GPU which at the time for me was something like a GTX 970, RX 580 or GTX 1060. Strange comparing the FX to 1st gen, a comparison to 3rd gen would have been fairer and showed how it missed the hype so bad. After that it could only compete on price. As you said at the end, its time has gone and an early gen ryzen is much much better for a cheap budget rig, especially with the upgrade path. The FX was bad compared to the hype, but wasn't as bad for its performance. I like that it tried to up the core count for consumer cpus and include automatic overclocking support.
Gaming was not great for the 8350, but productivity when setup right was significantly better. I remember my stock 8350 beating i7 4770 in solidworks renders when I was at school, while my 8350 was bottleneck by a HDD while the i7 had a SSD which makes a big difference for solidworks. Same for VMs with those extra threads you could push more out of it then you could with i5 which would be usually double the price of it at the time when I was buying my FX.
I was looking into possibly upgrading from the prebuilt mobo that came with my 10th gen i7 lenovo build. I'm realizing that 5.1 analog audio is a thing of the past. I actually need it for the 5.1 logitech z906's I just bought. I love that it was a standard on almost all nicer older boards
I had an 8150 for a while, had real fun overclocking it and tweaking it, but ended up switching to a i7 2700k as i had stability issues with 8150. after the 2700k, 4 years ago upgraded to ryzen 1600 laptop and been on amd ever since
Excellent video. I still use my fx8350 on the same Asus ROG motherboard, at 4.6ghz, though with 1866 RAM. Since 2012-13, the GPUs in the system evolved from an HD7970 through R9 390X, RX580 Nitro, to the GTX1660ti that is still there now. What is really impressive in your stats is that with the RTX3080 it generally produces playable frame rates, despite the scheduling burden from that GPU. Sat next to my old beast is a newish machine in which a Ryzen 5800x3D powers an RX7800xt. Your data suggests I could have put the new GPU into the old machine and it would have done quite well. The old PC gets more use for gaming than the new one. It has about 1,200 games installed, whereas the new one has 3. I will admit though that Starfield is much better on a powerful machine. Cyberpunk does look better, but is really playable on both. Red Dead 2 likewise. I've always been happy with the fx8350 and still am...
When it comes to CPUs and gaming, i only look at the 1% lows. Having higher 1%, means a smoother experience, regardless of average frame rate. Nice motherboard you got there btw :)
My first ever gaming desktop was a prebuilt that had this CPU and a RX 480 4GB. Loved that little machine for what it was. My sister has it now, but she has it in storage, and I fear by the time she does get it out, it'll be useless even as a time capsule...
Still using it right now 10 years old might hold some record for best value in computing, the entire system (With 16GB of good ddr3 and and an ssd!) was about $400 plus GFX card. (Its marked FX-8320 but its the same basic hardware and easilly overclocked to 8350 numbers, though I have it underclocked to 3.5GHz with boost disabled to reduce annoying swings in fan speed) Never had any problem with memory, stock speed or XMP. My whole system idles at 80w and hits ~200w with an 8core CPU stress test. This is with minimum load on the graphics card, just a gui desktop on 2×1080p screens. (Screens not included in the power numbers.) The only reason for me to upgrade are some newer hardware APIs that I need for a compute accelerator card, but that is a very narrow requirement that might effect 1% of the population. Really I would rather get some server hardware than an upgraded desktop, but even used the price of used servers is the same as new mid-range desktop hardware. (Used but not too old, or I get right back to the same API problem) First gen of Xeon scalable(silver gold etc; Skylake) hardware is just starting to come down to hobbyiest prices. Then there is the whole GPU-value situation, which has become even more messed up on the compute side than it is on the gaming side. I think I'll just wait another 6-12 months on both used server and GPU. My local craigslist is full of wishful sellers lately (Like I can build the computer new for what they are asking.)
I was using a six core Phenom II when Bulldozer was released so I was quite happy to stay on the Phenom. It beat the 8 core Bulldozer in some scenarios. Stronger single core performance. Switched to the Intel 4790k a couple of years later.
the quad core 955 black edition overclocked out performed the 8350 aswell, it was horrid, I stayed with the 955 waaaay longer then I wanted to then finally gave up and spent the cash for an intel chip
@@_M.... Yes, I had the same one. It was a really neat CPU. I coupled it with a R9 290X for a while before upgrading my system. I vividly remember playing Far Cry 4 on that setup.
I have used FX systems for almost 8 years from 2014 till 2022 (FX-6300 and 8350). It was alright, I also knew it wasn't the best, but for 1080p max details I always found matching GPUs - used it even with 5700XT. Of course, the given graphics card would have been able to perform better with newer CPUs, but... it was still playable without compromises. However, the 5950x was a definite upgrade, different universe.
I had to use one of these paired with a 3090 when my i7-11700KF system had the motherboard get taken out by a power surge, the bottleneck was insane even at 4k gameplay...I have since got myself a Ryzen 7 3700X and replaced the 3090 with a 7900 XT (had a titan xp and had to sell the 3090, used the titan xp for a couple months before getting the 7900 XT)
Hmmm...there was no "2nd Gen Bulldozer". FX-8350 is "Piledriver", and while the changes were incremental, there was changes in place on the technology, including it supporting Socket FM2/FS1/FP2. Outside of that, great video. The choice of games to test were def period correct for the processor given they were mostly titles released during its retail life.
❤❤❤❤❤ Your review was excellent, but in the real world. Benchmarks are benchmarks, but actually using it and popping it up with an add-on M dot 2 large and making it faster. It makes it a pretty impressive c. P. U. And I bought them all and I loved them.
I've got a couple 8350's and I'm astonished at how capable they are. With a bit of effort overclocking on a good enough motherboard the FX 8350 can outperform some (newer than the 8350), Intel systems at gaming. Unfortunately because of age and lack of some instruction sets newer productivity software doesn't fare as well as gaming does. With the right GPU an fx 8350 can even produce a decent playable experience in cyberpunk 2077. While it won't maintain a 60fps avg on a GPU that doesn't bottleneck the hell out of the 8350, (.1% low is near cinematic on an RX 580 even though avg is over 60) at 1080p low with low crowd density an r9 290 or GTX 970 can get very close to 60/45/35 producing better gaming results than the 4790k using the same GPU.
After the 2.0 update, while it's as fast as it used to be on modern systems, on something this borderline, cyberpunk in particular is unlikely to hold up well any longer.
I'm still running that CPU now and I have had this rig for 10 years. (Feb 2024 writing this) It still runs everything and is a little slow on game loading at times but they are very playable. I'm also running a RX580 with it. I am considering retiring it for a newer Ryzen unit self build.
I love the FX 8350. I bought one years ago to put together a PS4Pro killer and it worked wonderfully at it's job. It's basically Nehalem with AVX. If Intel had gotten AVX baked into Nehalem, the FX series might never have been released. At 4.8 Ghz you'll see that it has about the same SCIPC as an i5 2400 and MCIPC of a 4770. Giving it legs it should never have had. This processor is still a good entry level chip for older and less demanding games. As well as a great daily for normal workloads.
@@andrewcrocker22 TY for asking. Started with an HD 7850 as that was PS4 Spec, then added an RX 480 8GB to beat the specs of the PS4Pro and XBOne. The last GPU I used in it was a GTX 1080 which was overkill but still fun.
@@Trick-FramedThe thing is I'm confused... I have a gtx 1650 paired with it... Planning to upgrade the gpu to a gtx 1660 super.... But I am not sure if the performance gains would be worth it... (ps I don't go for used gpus) so the gtx 1660 super is still high going for $230 usd
@@Trick-FramedI'm tempted to go for a RX 6600 but I've seen videos that the 8 channel bus is going to cause severe bottlenecks especially considering that fx 8350 motherboards only support a gen 2 pcie slot 😑
@@andrewcrocker22 1660ti/GTX 1070 are about what the CPU can handle at max. Sure it'll bottleneck the GPU a bit but not much and you'll get more frames. Thing is alot of new titles struggle on this. If you have a 1650 and you want more performance maybe it's time for an upgrade? Board, chip and memory can be cheaper than a 1660 super brand new after tax and ship. Something to think about. If you want to do it the other way and want to get your next GPU first? Get the best you can buy for the money you have. The FX chips work a little better with AMD GPUs due to lower driver overhead but if you are playing games tuned for Nvidia, that doesn't matter. YMMV and good luck!
I had a phenom 2 x6, a 95W model, I forget the model number and clock rate. I overclocked it to around 3.8 GHz on a cheap board, though the voltage was high and it consumed reportedly about 160W. I was thinking of buying the 8350 but it didn't seem to make sense to spend well over 100€ on it, as I felt I'd have to OC it to 4.6 GHz just to reach the SP performance. Then the 8350 reached a 50€ price point and I wanted to buy it but missed the opportunity. Then Phenom II became trouble. Not only was it sort of slow, but it lacked instruction sets required by new software, SSE 4.2 I think. Eventually a free i5 3570 computer fell into my lap and solved that problem or low SP performance. But MP performance was just the same as Phenom. I think an overclocked 8350 would have done better overall. I hope you're adding both 3570 and a Phenom II into the comparison eventually. I expect that you can even run the Phenom on the same board.
I remember the hype surrounding bulldozer. A guy I played bad company 2 with was so excited to "upgrade" to one. I was running a dual core am64 at the time, and went to a 1090t after that. That was a great processor, but unfortunately was paired with a crappy mb. I recently picked up an old gaming pc for free, had a fx8120 in it, so that's what I'm currently using as a media/spare game pc. It does pretty well, but really chugs on anything that's the least bit single thread demanding
I just remember the morning bulldoer launched my inbox blew up with people wanting to buy my 4ghz capable 1090T. I had a super cheap 15 2500k build a week later.
I owned one of these about 10 years ago, paired with a ga-970 mb and 2x4GB of GSkill DDR3 Ram at 1866mhz. I had gone to the store with the intention of also bringing home an AMD R9 270, but had to settle on a GTX 660. I remember the "8 Core Cpu" marketing at the time and admit I might of gotten caught up in the hype a bit. Performance was decent, It ran skyrim really well. I had upgraded from Q6600 with 4gb of ram and a 512MB HD4650.
I was given a FX 8350 on a Gigabyte 990 board, along with a Gigabyte HD 7979 GHz edition GPU in exchange for upgrading the previous owners pc. I threw all the parts into a NZXT case of the same vintage, slapped a cooler master 212 evo on it, and added 16 gb of unknown mix master ddr3. Works great as a multi monitor machine for watching football or F1. I pretty much only play New World, and nope it dosen't cut that mustard, lol.
I had that chip for a while and it was fairly decent to me. I ran AMD most of the time and as much as I know Intel was ahead after their Core2 and then Core I series, I appreciated the price and upgrade paths with AMD, reason why I stuck with them. In this case with an AM3 I went from a Phenom II 955 to an FX8350 Previously on the AM2 I went from an Athlon X2 5200 to a Phenom 9950 Long before that I went from a K6-233 to a K6-2 333 And now I went from a Ryzen 3600X to a Ryzen 5800X. Always buying later in life cycles trying to get the best performance upgrades for the price :) As an I.T. guy tho, It would be impossible to list the amount of computers I have had growing up, many who I simply gifted or sold for super cheap. Something I do a lot of. The sandy bridges are in my opinion some of the best most useful long lasting chips you can find. a good 1155 socket today will still perform, and sadly outperform the FX8350 for the vast majority of cases.
My fx6300 served me for 9 years. Certainly not the best but i could play all my games and they ran pretty well. Was about to switch to intel until i learned about ryzen (last few years i didnt follow pc tech etc) and chose that. Very happy with the 5 5600x. I think ill stick to team red a bit longer.
Its very impressive what old am3+ cpus can still do. I bought my partner a pc with an rx 560, fx 6300 and 8 gigs of ram. put another 8 gigs in and upgraded the rx 560 to a gtx 1660S and got her into pc gaming for less than 200 :)
I remember having a "4" core APU back in the day cause they were sold in cheap all-in-one PCs. Never had any complaints until I switched to an actual 4 core Haswell. The difference was night and day.
I have 5 systems sitting around my computer room with Fx-8350s in them. They all still run just fine. I have had no issues with any of them. I paired one of them up with an RX 6650 and it is a surprisingly "good" gaming system....depending on your game.
While i never had an AMD processor until the 3950x, if my memory serves me correctly, the i7-980x amd 990x were not "desktop" processors, but HEDT with more CPU cores, more memory channels, and more PCIe lanes, half way between a normal desktop processor like the other i7 models and the 8350, and HPC processors like the Xeon 7550 or the 16 core Opteron(dont ask me the name because i never bothered to order one) IIRC the i7-980 or 990x were the same as my pair of Xeon X5690, but only supported a single processor per board instead of my two, and possibly only supported 1066 instead of 1333 RAM Now i'd personally argue that they werent HEDT but instead just trying to shrink the candy bar like Nvidia did with the GTX 10 series and RTX 40 series, where they sold you lower end cards, with higher brand names. Take the 80 class Titan XP, or the 60 class 4070TI
Back in 2012, software companies were only starting to learn how to program software for use with multi core CPUs. The AMD FX 8350 is still able to hold it's own when paired with a good GPU even in 2024.
I HAVE FX 8150 BLACK EDITION RUNNING GTX 1660TI 6G DDR6 VERY PLEASED !!! M.2 KINGSTON 7000 MBS 4 SSD RAID 0 INSANE SPEEDS SMOOTH GAMING. FX 8350 THEN THE LEGEND FX 9590 5G BLACK EDITION. RTX 3060 12G O'CD 4 SSD M.2 CARD 4X 1T 7000 MBS SUPER PLEASED.. EYZEN 5 3600X MSI DRAGON GTX 1080 TI 11G.
My 8350 is still running today. Just replaced it for a 7950x3d. I'll miss it. Survived a psu blow. A few upgrades. Excited to be moving on but also sad to leave it behind.
My first build was a FX 6350, I ran it at 4.8GHZ for a time. The first few months at 5 ghz but had to clock it down to 4.8 after a year at @5GHZ. Before I went Ryzen I had to clock it at 4.4 GHZ for it to function at all.
I still use the 8350 on that exact Biostar motherboard! OC'd to 4.5GHz. Still runs every game I throw at it, albeit with some tweaks. I think you should run the same tests vs the first gen i5 and i7s with the microcode mitigations against Spectre and Meltdown applied. A lot of Intel's performance gains back then were the result of cutting corners in their designing of those chips and the significant hit in performance they see after they're applied proves it.
This was my first custom build, I loved this CPU for how broke and ignorant I was at the time, I thought I was spitting on everything intel with this and my XFX 2GB AMD GPU
Friend of mine owns one. He still calls it an eight core but that's another debate. I remember buying Intel for gaming around this time period just based on performance.
I'm stil running an fx 8230 with a gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 motherboard. GPU is a GTX 750 Ti. seems to serve me well with productivity and playing the old games
I ended up with an FX-8350 because I never really had the money to change platforms. I got a Phenom 2 x4 965 on a 790x mobo in 2009. I kept the rest of my old PC, just upgraded the core bits. A few years later I upgraded the mobo to a 990x because I could use the 965 and same RAM. I had the plan to upgrade to the 8350 when I got the new mobo because getting the motherboard, then the CPU, then more RAM, and maybe eventually a new GPU, was more feasible than buying it all at the same time. Intel was just too expensive at the time. and I also *really* hated how quickly a platform was dropped. The fact that I could even consievably upgrade from the Deneb to Bulldozer was so much better than what was possible buying into Intel at the time. In hindsight, if I could have found a way to go with the i5-2500k or 3570k I probably could have ridden that until Ryzen came out.
Intel overclock cost is high, since not only do you need the K processor which costs extra, you also need a chip set that will allow, another cost point. On AMD you could go with basic kit and tune a fair bit out of it. I still think long term mileage is better out of 8350 with overclock than 3570 without. I7 would have been an advantage though, a substantial one.
I'm still rocking an FX-6300, it's slow, but I can still play Forza Horizon 5 at around 60 fps, so not that bad. Still, I wanna upgrade to Ryzen in the near future.
My rig was… 8350 @4.7g on that msi dragon mobo 32gb ram with a 128gb name on pcie a few years into its life. I think it’s the capability of taking up to 64gb of cheap Chinese ram that keeps its valuable. It was in the gorgeous fractal define s case and I donated it to my local makers space. So much regret now.
Weird memory compatibility issues you got there. I remembered running a G.Skill Trident X 2133mhz albeit on a FX-6300 just fine on the same Asus Crosshair Formula-Z. Would've been nice to know the difference in performance between a 1600mhz kit and the 2133mhz kit.
Yeah, really weird. I've own the cheapest AsRock 970 boards - every kit I've manually OC'd from 1600 would do 2133 or very close (with FSB) at 1.65V and none of the CPUs or boards struggled with that. In fact, every one of these cheap boards would do 2400 no problem - but my actual 2400 kit was 8GB, so I could never use it for that.
I still use mine daily as a gaming/entertainment and emulation rig. Does literally anything i throw at it up to ps3/xbox360 and even some newer stuff. Overclock to 4.5ghz with a 1060 6gb 😂. Easily handle any computer game at 1080p and even 4k in a lot of em. Next computer will be a one of those mini boards with a 7840hs
I still use an FX6300 with MSI R9 7970 Lightning edition graphics and 8gb RAM. I would like to double the RAM when I get the chance, this pc does everything I want it to do, inlcuding playing World of Tanks at high settings.
Amazingly informative video. I've still kept my Bulldozer and Piledriver chips as they were pretty decent chips (in that they were so cheap) and I look at them as a testament to how far AMD have come since those days. These chips were the first ones I had when I moved over from console gaming to PC gaming and they served me well for many years. Going back to how far they've come, we can all appreciate how poor AMD were in their decision making back then however we must not forget that this was compounded by Intel who had (more or less since their inception) crushed them through various multi-million dollar litigations and advertising practices - for instance strong-arming retailers and manufacturers into using Intel chips over AMD's by literally paying them not to use them and using downright horrible tactics against AMD. Intel used to pay Dell $1 billion dollars a year not to use AMD and this really damaged their reputation. It's a wonder that AMD survived all that, but now after all of that AMD are truly flourishing. I'm happy because technology and innovation is at the forefront which is better for the consumer. Subscribed!
im still using FX8350 with corsair value 32GB 1.6ghz, Strix RX590 on a Gigabyte 970A-D3P Rev2. its all on auto OC with a Arctic Freezer A32 dual fan with MX6 paste installed in a high airflow chassis fractal core 2300. although i did keep the old pc and now using R7 5700X with Phantom RX5500XT 8GB, Corsair Vengeance 3.2ghz 64GB, MSI B450 Gaming Max Plus. im currently interested in buying the new RX7600XT.
From back then to now
Running an AMD FX8530 @4.4Ghz / 32GB DDR3 @ 1800 / All SandDisk Extreme SSDs / RX6600M
Playing overwatch 2 and Diablo4 on max settings / and G()d of War on Medium - long term it was been amazing!
I ran an FX-8350 for 7 years until I finally upgraded. It's still in use hooked up to the TV for my kids to play games on. Paired with a GTX 1080 it does just fine to this day.
my only complain for the Fx8350 as a sec. build is the power consumption... you can get away with a 1st gen Ryzen 1600 in a cheap a320 mobo for just a little more money than the Fx, and will draw 1/2 the power and produce way less heat
I ran nearly the same CPU, the FX 8320, until about 2015, and at the time, I was extremely happy with it, especially considering what it cost. I knew it wasn't faster than its Intel rivals, but it was still plenty fast enough for the gaming and productivity tasks I was up to at the time. Fond memories of this much maligned low point in AMD's history.
The fun thing is there are still games it can be decent with.
I can’t believe that 9590s go for 150 still
@@sk8420_ That's the one that was architecturally the same, but clocked really high right? Did you ever run one? I remember the VRMs on my board being my major obstacle to overclocking the 8320.
what games did you play on that cpu? im trying to find games to play but this cpu cant handle anything new.
@@SoulZZ5545Someone I know got it to run Baldur's Gate 3 at playable FPS.
He did have to upgrade from that 2GB GTX960 to something with 4GB+ of VRAM and actually put a SSD in the system, but it worked out in the end.
My FX-8350 is still in active service as my backup desktop PC that also serves as entertainment PC, have it connected to a projector in a small living room and play some movies with it every now and then, paired it with a GTX 1060 6GB, thing can run The Division 2 on medium settings just fine, it's not a great CPU of its time but it's still got some life in it even as a gaming PC.
im still a proud owner to this day
its my nostalgia pc with 2400 mhz ram,rx 580 8gb,sabertooth 990fx
Running my 10-year old gaming rig on this very same processor! It's served me well (completely stock), and no wonder I needed to upgrade my PSU early in its life. Upgrade planning underway!
I remember buying an Athlon X4 860K for my first ever gaming PC while my friends had the spare money for FX 8350/8370 CPUs. It wasn't bad for what I played at the time being paired with an R7 270X my coworker sold me for $50 (this was back in 2016). I think about these old architectures from time to time and it makes me happy people still make videos about them occasionally.
I love that, my 1st build was an Athlon 860k as well paired with a GTX 660 back in 2014 & 8gb ram
I got an 8350 in later 2015 and did GTX 660 Sli in later 2015
@@DrEvilTag That's freaking awesome! When I bought the processor I believe it was only $80 on Amazon so it was super easy for me to be able to afford. Unfortunately through rough times and where I am now, I haven't really left that era of PC parts as I currently have an Eluktronics laptop with an i7 6700HQ and GTX 1060. It's getting me by though for what I currently play :) Maybe I'll get an upgrade later down the road somewhere.
I'm still running this processor on a budget build I built in 2016. I'm here to see see if it's still worth a damn. It has served me well for a good while now.
I bought my fx 8350 back in 2016
It was a good choice and it was on sale. I don't regret buying it and it still works fine 40-60 fps in games like warzone, rdr2 on high etc
I got one of these FX8350, I used it for gaming ever since the release until just a year ago when the motherboard started having issues with warping resulting in overheating VRM. I then a support bracket for it and made it a testing rig instead. I always ran mine at 4,6GHZ as my chip had two unstable cores above that and it was paired with 32GB ram that I overclock timings on to very tight speeds and I later had my GTX1080 Extreme edition also really high clocked (2050Mhz) I had very good performance in pretty much any game over it´s life span, I even managed to get top rankings with similar platforms on 3Dmark with my stuff. it was a hot system but very decent for almost 10 years of usage.
Im using a fx8300 @ 3,5ghz stil. Honestly I cannot tell you when I will buy other PC. Cause It does what I want. I play everything. For the price, FX was my best purchase.
You do not play everything 😂
@@D_Webb Now I dont play Alan Wake II only. And I wont play it. With FX I play all games I want. The question is: Core i 2nd and 3rd was more expensive than FX. Can the people that bought it play all games in the world? Answer: no! This is the answer.
@@opinadorrj4337 for the price of an Fx 8 core you could get a locked i5 of the low tier, which was insane sin Fx 8300 blasted away the i5 in multitasking, could beat them in almost any productivity task and despite loosing in some games (in the "fps insane race" in which some "CPU" is the winner by 4 more average fps on a cleant test PC) still fx could game just fine.
That being said, its 2024... all the entire AM4 socked passed by at this point and we are on the 2nd/3rd AM5 socket generation... To say that an Fx cpu holds might be true up until you start doing things with the Fx8350 CPU and then try to do these same things with an R7 5700x (like the jump i made in my case). Then you realize how much slower really is and how far away from current standars really is, since 5700x is an average "trade of all jacks" CPU, good at everything at a low TDP but not an extreme gaming CPU nor productivity oriented processor
I've had this CPU since 2014 and I'm still happy with it. Recently I got a refurbished RTX 3080 for $290 and I'm really happy with the combo.
83xx handles many games just fine, esp before 2016. Meanwhile, some newer games can utilize all the threads of the 83xx and still be playable. I had my 8350 tweaked & overclocked with FSB(HTT) & ram @ 2200mhz on a 990FXA board (with APM & C&C turned off) -- this literally gave me 15%+ more performance -- sometimes it seemed like even more than that because it really helped diminish the stuttering & 1% lows. The cpu will be bottlenecked by the 3080, but you can always transfer the card to another build when ready. With the combo you have now, you can crank up the render resolution with no loss in performance. When I was still using my 8350, I ran many games @ 1800p / 2560p (4k) -- some newer games like BL3/wonderlands ran pretty well. With the overclock, i'd get around 80 FPS with dips in the mid 60s -- without the overlock (or overclocking with just the multiplier) FPS would be more in the 60s with dips in the mid 40s. It really depends on what you do & the games you play. When it comes to web browsing/mutlitasking/general use, 83xx can seem nearly as snappy as something much newer. A well optimized 83xx can outperform a stock 9590, even @ a few hundred mhz less.
I found this video very interesting and very fun to watch. One thing i wish you could analyze at some point is how the FX-8350 compares against simular processors from the time period in multi-tasking activities and multi threaded usage in games. I heard that in games that utilize more than 4 cores, the FX processor tends to do a pretty good job on the 1% and .1% lows compared with 4 core/8 threaded CPUs like the i7. They tend to have a much smoother frame time and less stutter in games (at least in other comparisons i watched). I look forward to see you do this test. The FX processors didn't age so badly as some people think.
I liked the FX line, I had a few FX chips over the years, I daily drove a FX8320, I like FX not due to its performance, it was not great, but the fun I had with it, overclocking, forced me to learn more about it due to ya know not being faster than Intel's offerings, plus they undervolt like crazy. So at a cheap price point at the time, I would say it was worth it, If I had less bills I had to worry about, sure I would of went Intel, but I also probably never cared to tweak the living crap out of the thing.
Totally agree currently running an undervolted FX8350 myself and it cut its electricity usage down from 120 watts to 86 watts and lowered its temperature by 11 degrees celsius on full load and 9 on stock so definitely worth it. Managed a -0.18 voltage offset on it and that is with a 970 gaming pro carbon board from MSI.
my Mashine is still alive AMD FX8385 with a RX560 8gb graca and 32 gb RAM, i am still happy with it, most time i use it for my HomeOffice, sometimes i play some games, and the most games are running fine
So glad you came out with this vid! I really enjoy seeing the frame rates compare between generations. And what a beast the recent 5600x is compared with the top cpu's of only a few years ago. Anyway, I have about 20 or so boxes running at the house here, mostly on Linux, but I have a fetish for the fx8350. I think it was because it was my first real foray into overclocking. And then water cooling. And then more about thermal behavior. The 8350 was the gateway drug for me. It shouldn't sell for as much as it does in various places, but it's kind of like a classic z28 or Ford Mustang or something. They don't compare with current generations, but people still love them. That's the fx8350 for me.
I used to run FX8320 Piledriver on a Asus 99x motherboard with 16gb ram at 1600MHz and a GTX 660 in 2012 after 5 years I upgraded the ram to 32gb and 1866 mhz and the gpu to gtx 770. now I run a r7 3700x, 32gb at 3200mhz with a rtx 3070 on a msi 570x, both cpus were watercooled with AIO the 8320 on a 120mm rad and the 3700x on a 320mm rad
I had an FX 8350 on the same ROG crosshair with 16gb of 2400mhz hyperX savage kit running a small OC to 4.7ghz on an Ev0 212 with many gpu's from a 750ti up to a 5700xt and it handled everything i threw it it.. gaming and basic video editing. Had it since the release and only upgraded last April as the board started to randomly drop usb connections.. so.. around 11 years without a problem and although i will admit i am bias towards the Fx i personally think it was a decent work horse that does not deserve the abuse it gets.. Yes was slower than a 2700k.. and yes it was hot.. and power mad.. but as i said.. it did eveything i asked of it and if the board had not popped i would still be using it.. The maddest part is i sold the board as faulty and still got £30.. + the £35 for the cpu and peobably would have prefered to get another Croshair but working examples are still selling for more than a B550 haha.. Loved it and would buy again as a retro XP pc if the prices come down in the future.
I still have my 8320 PC. I fire it up sometimes to play old games, just for good o'le memories.
My son got my old rig... FX-8350 + 1060 6gb. Still running most of the games just fine. I'm gonna buy a 7800xt this year and then my old rig will receive the last upgrade of it's lifetime, a rx6600xt. I got it this CPU on sale back in 2013.
They have aged really well. But the IPC is still horrible unless you overclock the NB to 2600, HT to 2400+ and the cores to 4.5 or so - they basically don't scale with some all core overclock at all. Those are all very doable on reasonable voltages and allow you to maximize 2400 DDR3 with ideally with the lowest timings you can do and tuned sub timings too. 1600CL9 just doesn't do it any justice.
Set up like I said, you'll outperform a stock i7 4770 with 1600CL9 memory in most scenarios - say in an old office PC.
I ran corsair dominator @ 2133. I have some 2666 I might try later.
Almost. You still won't get the same single core IPC. It ranks about an i5 2400/2500 in that arena. It def does do 4770 multi core IPC which is amazing.
Edit: @b0ne91 's comment is correct in that you want to OC the HT and NB to those exact numbers. You can get more if you push but those are stable numbers. I'm running 16GB DDR3 2133 G.Skill Sniper RAM with NB to 2600 and HT to 2400. And i'm running my chip at 4.7 ghz for stability purposes. It can run 5.2 but I do not have a water cooler for it so there's no reason to do that at all. I'm running on a Cryorig H7.
far from it. it will not outperform the haswell i7. At best it may hold up to and beat sandybridge i5 in some things. I still have the FX 8350 (retired in a box somewhere) - I know all the tricks.. it will not beat even a stock sandy i7 in gaming.. FX will only get similar performance to a haswell i7 in video rendering and other applications that can use all threads. Everything else the stock i7 will be clearly ahead of the OC FX while consuming far less power.
@@ProcessedDigitally If you actually overclock it like I said, it will outperform the i7 4770 on 1600C9 RAM in most modern games. Haswell has far superior single core IPC. I'm not suggesting that the FX8350 is the better choice - it's terrible for a variety of reasons. Just that the test scenario here isn't great because just dumping a bunch of voltage and overclocking the core which was NEVER the bottleneck with these in the first place doesn't do anything.
Overclocking cache/memory controller is where it's at. You're wasting thermal headroom by putting more than 1.4V into the cores and going above 4.5Ghz unless you have a 360mm AIO.
@@Trick-Framed Yes and no. It will never even get close to an i5 4440 in a synthetic single core benchmark. But the reality is that games don't scale that way and single core IPC was never the bottleneck with these CPUs. They're memory/cache starved, especially because it's shared. That's why you don't waste your thermal headroom by dumping a bunch of voltage into cores and take them to 4.8Ghz - it's. waste. Settle for 1.4V and 4.5Ghz and put however much you can into RAM, Northbridge and Hypertransfer. Especially RAM and NB scale really well - double so in games.
My mother board die on my AMD 5600x and had to use my AMD FX-8300 for two weeks last month..I had not use that PC for 3 years, now it did just fine for work with windows 10, yes it was slower but it got me by, until my other PC motherboard came in was up runing again... So I keeep mine around just in case... I still Like it can still be used for work if need be...
Hello.
Interesting benches with "modern" games.
I used my FX8350 for 5 years (from 2012 to 2017) and my father is still using it nowadays, so for more than a decade now, doing gaming and encodings.
I never could overclock it more than 4650MHz before reaching temperature problems, but that was more that 10% from the stock frequency so I was rather happy.
I think I had 1866MHz RAM, though. It's strange you couldn't pass 1600MHz, but my memory is fuzzy.
I never really though I was CPU limited.
And you demonstrated here that, on some games, it is still capable to deliver an OK experience.
Thank you for this video.
Mine is still running, and paired with my 980, it is playing all my daughters games on a 4k tv.
With careful overclocking, these can typically match the i3-2100 series in most games of that era...
Very impressive. Now imagine what they could do with twice the cores and some overclocks!
They can match an i5 2400 in single core and a 4770 in Multi core to be precise, at 4.7 Ghz.
It actually age well compare to newer Intel Pentium G4400 released in 2015. It's a 2c 2t Skylake based CPU. Even though it beats the FX-8350 in single core. G4400 would perform horribly in games that uses more than 2 cores like Valorant. It's a funny story how I discover that. I tested FX-8350 with GTX 580 and 4GB at DDR3-2000 CL8 or CL7 (2x2 config very rare Hynix DDR3 that is made in USA It could run same timings as DDR2-800 ram at 1333) on Valorant.
My expectation is it will would run pretty bad then I was surprise to see it hit like 140+ fps and peak 190 fps
So instead of giving the FX-8350 I gave the G4400 to my niece who wanted to play Valorant and I even gave her the newer RX 550 with up to date drivers and with 16GBs of DDR4-2400 ram. I'm thinking that G4400 would easily run that game because it would score like 700+ pts while FX-8350 would score like 480 pts on Geekbench5 at the time.
Then she complain to me why the game is so slow. After looking at what she was doing. She was trying to play like Spotify and had like websites in the background. I decided to test it a few times with out those. and later had to limit the FPS to 45. Game could run like 80+ fps but lag spike became worse. It was not smooth at all. Now I realize 2c 2t is a bit outdated. lol
@@vanguard812-vf7hr2 cores 4 threads is useful for a router or a nas but not for much else. Sure, you can try it, some older games will run well, but anything new will not run well on 2c2t anymore. Nothing to do with memory, GPU or anything else you mentioned. It is a pure CPU bottleneck. Even with an RX 550. Giving her the FX might have solved a few problems but keeping the platform stable is something for an enthusiast. When well tuned you can run multiple apps and a game like Valorant at the same time. But you need to be able to tune memory, NB and HT in order to get the most from it.
The thing thats really interesting to me about bulldozer and namely the 8 core SKUs is just how much can be gained out of OCing on the platform. Obviously over a decade old this point and no reason to use over any recent low end offering. Yet you can still wring quite a bit of life out of an 83XX chip by doing 4.6 Or up, all core, paired with 2400mhz DDR3. I have an 8320 around that does 5ghz 1.4675v and the difference in ST perf is crazy compared against a stock 83XX. OCing completely smoothes out the hitching that normally ia experienced on a stock 8350 in newer games.
I used one at 4.7. I did a lot of encoding back then and intel couldn't match that performance. FMA3 was very fast.
@@TheGuruStud I missed out on the entirety of vishera and really the entire AMD slump leading up to ryzen. I adopted bulldozer when it launched but ended up selling my 8150 + 2x GTX 580 3gb amp2's build to my brother all but 4-5 months after switching to AM3+ so i never really got to fully enjoy the MT perf at the time outside of 3d rendering & video editing since games still scaled terribly at the time outside of single/dual core perf. Didnt end up coming back to custom pc as a hobby till 2018. So i dodged the bulk of the 4c-8t + 5-10% ipc gain every gen stagnation period. From 2018 onwards ive gotten to go back and enjoy vishera/sandy bridge/haswell/skylake etc etc through collecting & overclocking as a hobby but its still not the same as enjoying a product throughout its active lifespan and watching how it interacts with the software released when it is still newer hardware. But all and all bulldozer really didnt age super poorly for what it was. Where it had faults in being super cache starved it made up for being a strong overclocker thanks to its long pipeline design. I think had the circumstances been different and had i kept my system + stayed in the hobby. im sure i would have been happy with 990fx and am3+ as a platform for quite awhile.
AMD provided more features to the budget motherboards such as PCIe bifurcation.
They needed to. I built my first desktop during Haswell and nobody even considered AMD unless you were building a $500 PC. And it's not like I was untrusting, I had grown up seeing both Intel and AMD branding on PC stuff
@@cosmic_gate476 True. I remember so many console killer PCs during that time on youtube back in the day featuring FX 4xxx or FX 6xxx. They were cheaper but power hungry. I chose Intel at that time as my Dad wasn't familiar with AMD and he wanted to stick to a brand he knows.
@@AlashAls FX-6350 + 750 Ti or R7 260x 😅
Still own an FX-6300 machine. Always have been happy with it considering upgrade from C2Q6600 and at the bottom of the barrel price in which I paid with it.
Speaking of price I have always had Older AMD processors sell for far more than their Intel counter parts. It comes down to supply. So many more Intel processors were sold and exist so they are usually cheap.
my friend is still running his fx-8350 and a 1080ti stil plays most games with me but he has it overclocked and pretty good ram speed overclock
i still have mine, fx 8350 on a asus tuf mobo, using 295x2 gpu. just rebuilt it in new case. took stock rad off of gpu and put a 120 and repasted new sil pads. use it for daily tasking.
my fx 9590 was scoring over 900 single in cinebench my ram was at 2400 mhz at cl 9 with that same board . i was trading blows with first gen ryzen 1400 and 1500 . 5.4 ghz that cpu screamed
Thanks for the video, I always like a look back at the FX chips. I've had 2 FX 8350s. I only overclocked them to 4.5Ghz and 4.7Ghz. In older games they would get 70-100fps so would be a great pairing for a budget GPU which at the time for me was something like a GTX 970, RX 580 or GTX 1060.
Strange comparing the FX to 1st gen, a comparison to 3rd gen would have been fairer and showed how it missed the hype so bad. After that it could only compete on price.
As you said at the end, its time has gone and an early gen ryzen is much much better for a cheap budget rig, especially with the upgrade path.
The FX was bad compared to the hype, but wasn't as bad for its performance. I like that it tried to up the core count for consumer cpus and include automatic overclocking support.
Gaming was not great for the 8350, but productivity when setup right was significantly better. I remember my stock 8350 beating i7 4770 in solidworks renders when I was at school, while my 8350 was bottleneck by a HDD while the i7 had a SSD which makes a big difference for solidworks. Same for VMs with those extra threads you could push more out of it then you could with i5 which would be usually double the price of it at the time when I was buying my FX.
I was looking into possibly upgrading from the prebuilt mobo that came with my 10th gen i7 lenovo build. I'm realizing that 5.1 analog audio is a thing of the past. I actually need it for the 5.1 logitech z906's I just bought. I love that it was a standard on almost all nicer older boards
Still having a FX8350 and FX6300 systems. Not much use other than streaming video but either does the job at 1080p pretty nicely.
Dude the very first PC i bult was exactly using this CPU and i also got the same MOBO ! Thank you for this, it brings some good memories.
A 1 YOUR REVIEW WAS PERFECT CLEAR CLASSY WELL DONE..
This processor got me by during my early to mid 20's. Thank you fx8350.
I had an 8150 for a while, had real fun overclocking it and tweaking it, but ended up switching to a i7 2700k as i had stability issues with 8150. after the 2700k, 4 years ago upgraded to ryzen 1600 laptop and been on amd ever since
Excellent video. I still use my fx8350 on the same Asus ROG motherboard, at 4.6ghz, though with 1866 RAM. Since 2012-13, the GPUs in the system evolved from an HD7970 through R9 390X, RX580 Nitro, to the GTX1660ti that is still there now. What is really impressive in your stats is that with the RTX3080 it generally produces playable frame rates, despite the scheduling burden from that GPU. Sat next to my old beast is a newish machine in which a Ryzen 5800x3D powers an RX7800xt. Your data suggests I could have put the new GPU into the old machine and it would have done quite well. The old PC gets more use for gaming than the new one. It has about 1,200 games installed, whereas the new one has 3. I will admit though that Starfield is much better on a powerful machine. Cyberpunk does look better, but is really playable on both. Red Dead 2 likewise. I've always been happy with the fx8350 and still am...
When it comes to CPUs and gaming, i only look at the 1% lows. Having higher 1%, means a smoother experience, regardless of average frame rate. Nice motherboard you got there btw :)
that's not how u read data
That CHV-Z is practically the best AM3+ board.
@@nicholasxamotainiumgilgamesh Smooth is fast.
amd fx 6300 i used for about 5 years and saw no issues with it....played all my games great.
My first ever gaming desktop was a prebuilt that had this CPU and a RX 480 4GB. Loved that little machine for what it was. My sister has it now, but she has it in storage, and I fear by the time she does get it out, it'll be useless even as a time capsule...
Still using it right now 10 years old might hold some record for best value in computing, the entire system (With 16GB of good ddr3 and and an ssd!) was about $400 plus GFX card. (Its marked FX-8320 but its the same basic hardware and easilly overclocked to 8350 numbers, though I have it underclocked to 3.5GHz with boost disabled to reduce annoying swings in fan speed) Never had any problem with memory, stock speed or XMP.
My whole system idles at 80w and hits ~200w with an 8core CPU stress test. This is with minimum load on the graphics card, just a gui desktop on 2×1080p screens. (Screens not included in the power numbers.)
The only reason for me to upgrade are some newer hardware APIs that I need for a compute accelerator card, but that is a very narrow requirement that might effect 1% of the population. Really I would rather get some server hardware than an upgraded desktop, but even used the price of used servers is the same as new mid-range desktop hardware. (Used but not too old, or I get right back to the same API problem)
First gen of Xeon scalable(silver gold etc; Skylake) hardware is just starting to come down to hobbyiest prices.
Then there is the whole GPU-value situation, which has become even more messed up on the compute side than it is on the gaming side.
I think I'll just wait another 6-12 months on both used server and GPU. My local craigslist is full of wishful sellers lately (Like I can build the computer new for what they are asking.)
I was using a six core Phenom II when Bulldozer was released so I was quite happy to stay on the Phenom. It beat the 8 core Bulldozer in some scenarios. Stronger single core performance. Switched to the Intel 4790k a couple of years later.
I made the mistake of "upgrading" to the 8350, made the caps on my board swell...lol
the quad core 955 black edition overclocked out performed the 8350 aswell, it was horrid, I stayed with the 955 waaaay longer then I wanted to then finally gave up and spent the cash for an intel chip
my 1090T Thuban did 4ghz, it wrecked the launch FX 8150 in games and several other tasks. it was embarrssing.
@@Revoku Those were very good as well. I had only been using AMD processors until that point. Great bang for the buck back then.
@@_M.... Yes, I had the same one. It was a really neat CPU. I coupled it with a R9 290X for a while before upgrading my system. I vividly remember playing Far Cry 4 on that setup.
I have used FX systems for almost 8 years from 2014 till 2022 (FX-6300 and 8350). It was alright, I also knew it wasn't the best, but for 1080p max details I always found matching GPUs - used it even with 5700XT. Of course, the given graphics card would have been able to perform better with newer CPUs, but... it was still playable without compromises. However, the 5950x was a definite upgrade, different universe.
I had to use one of these paired with a 3090 when my i7-11700KF system had the motherboard get taken out by a power surge, the bottleneck was insane even at 4k gameplay...I have since got myself a Ryzen 7 3700X and replaced the 3090 with a 7900 XT (had a titan xp and had to sell the 3090, used the titan xp for a couple months before getting the 7900 XT)
Hmmm...there was no "2nd Gen Bulldozer". FX-8350 is "Piledriver", and while the changes were incremental, there was changes in place on the technology, including it supporting Socket FM2/FS1/FP2. Outside of that, great video. The choice of games to test were def period correct for the processor given they were mostly titles released during its retail life.
I still have my 9590. It was a bit of a hot mess, but I really enjoyed the platform. My Crosshair V board is no longer with us unfortunately.
I feel the FX line never got the appreciation they deserved. I had a 6300 and it was pretty solid for the day.
❤❤❤❤❤ Your review was excellent, but in the real world. Benchmarks are benchmarks, but actually using it and popping it up with an add-on M dot 2 large and making it faster. It makes it a pretty impressive c. P. U. And I bought them all and I loved them.
I've got a couple 8350's and I'm astonished at how capable they are.
With a bit of effort overclocking on a good enough motherboard the FX 8350 can outperform some (newer than the 8350), Intel systems at gaming.
Unfortunately because of age and lack of some instruction sets newer productivity software doesn't fare as well as gaming does.
With the right GPU an fx 8350 can even produce a decent playable experience in cyberpunk 2077.
While it won't maintain a 60fps avg on a GPU that doesn't bottleneck the hell out of the 8350, (.1% low is near cinematic on an RX 580 even though avg is over 60) at 1080p low with low crowd density an r9 290 or GTX 970 can get very close to 60/45/35 producing better gaming results than the 4790k using the same GPU.
After the 2.0 update, while it's as fast as it used to be on modern systems, on something this borderline, cyberpunk in particular is unlikely to hold up well any longer.
I'm still running that CPU now and I have had this rig for 10 years. (Feb 2024 writing this) It still runs everything and is a little slow on game loading at times but they are very playable. I'm also running a RX580 with it. I am considering retiring it for a newer Ryzen unit self build.
I love the FX 8350. I bought one years ago to put together a PS4Pro killer and it worked wonderfully at it's job. It's basically Nehalem with AVX. If Intel had gotten AVX baked into Nehalem, the FX series might never have been released. At 4.8 Ghz you'll see that it has about the same SCIPC as an i5 2400 and MCIPC of a 4770. Giving it legs it should never have had. This processor is still a good entry level chip for older and less demanding games. As well as a great daily for normal workloads.
What GPU did you pair it with?
@@andrewcrocker22 TY for asking. Started with an HD 7850 as that was PS4 Spec, then added an RX 480 8GB to beat the specs of the PS4Pro and XBOne. The last GPU I used in it was a GTX 1080 which was overkill but still fun.
@@Trick-FramedThe thing is I'm confused... I have a gtx 1650 paired with it... Planning to upgrade the gpu to a gtx 1660 super.... But I am not sure if the performance gains would be worth it... (ps I don't go for used gpus) so the gtx 1660 super is still high going for $230 usd
@@Trick-FramedI'm tempted to go for a RX 6600 but I've seen videos that the 8 channel bus is going to cause severe bottlenecks especially considering that fx 8350 motherboards only support a gen 2 pcie slot 😑
@@andrewcrocker22 1660ti/GTX 1070 are about what the CPU can handle at max. Sure it'll bottleneck the GPU a bit but not much and you'll get more frames. Thing is alot of new titles struggle on this. If you have a 1650 and you want more performance maybe it's time for an upgrade? Board, chip and memory can be cheaper than a 1660 super brand new after tax and ship. Something to think about. If you want to do it the other way and want to get your next GPU first? Get the best you can buy for the money you have. The FX chips work a little better with AMD GPUs due to lower driver overhead but if you are playing games tuned for Nvidia, that doesn't matter. YMMV and good luck!
It was a good companion in my times when I was a student and couldn't afford an expensive rig.
I had a phenom 2 x6, a 95W model, I forget the model number and clock rate. I overclocked it to around 3.8 GHz on a cheap board, though the voltage was high and it consumed reportedly about 160W. I was thinking of buying the 8350 but it didn't seem to make sense to spend well over 100€ on it, as I felt I'd have to OC it to 4.6 GHz just to reach the SP performance.
Then the 8350 reached a 50€ price point and I wanted to buy it but missed the opportunity.
Then Phenom II became trouble. Not only was it sort of slow, but it lacked instruction sets required by new software, SSE 4.2 I think.
Eventually a free i5 3570 computer fell into my lap and solved that problem or low SP performance. But MP performance was just the same as Phenom. I think an overclocked 8350 would have done better overall.
I hope you're adding both 3570 and a Phenom II into the comparison eventually. I expect that you can even run the Phenom on the same board.
I remember the hype surrounding bulldozer. A guy I played bad company 2 with was so excited to "upgrade" to one. I was running a dual core am64 at the time, and went to a 1090t after that. That was a great processor, but unfortunately was paired with a crappy mb. I recently picked up an old gaming pc for free, had a fx8120 in it, so that's what I'm currently using as a media/spare game pc. It does pretty well, but really chugs on anything that's the least bit single thread demanding
I just remember the morning bulldoer launched my inbox blew up with people wanting to buy my 4ghz capable 1090T. I had a super cheap 15 2500k build a week later.
I owned one of these about 10 years ago, paired with a ga-970 mb and 2x4GB of GSkill DDR3 Ram at 1866mhz. I had gone to the store with the intention of also bringing home an AMD R9 270, but had to settle on a GTX 660. I remember the "8 Core Cpu" marketing at the time and admit I might of gotten caught up in the hype a bit. Performance was decent, It ran skyrim really well. I had upgraded from Q6600 with 4gb of ram and a 512MB HD4650.
I'm still using this FX8350 processor and playing modern games at 60fps like Red Dead Redemption 2 etc..
What gpu?
I was given a FX 8350 on a Gigabyte 990 board, along with a Gigabyte HD 7979 GHz edition GPU in exchange for upgrading the previous owners pc. I threw all the parts into a NZXT case of the same vintage, slapped a cooler master 212 evo on it, and added 16 gb of unknown mix master ddr3. Works great as a multi monitor machine for watching football or F1. I pretty much only play New World, and nope it dosen't cut that mustard, lol.
The 8350 was my first upgrade I ever purchased
I had that chip for a while and it was fairly decent to me. I ran AMD most of the time and as much as I know Intel was ahead after their Core2 and then Core I series, I appreciated the price and upgrade paths with AMD, reason why I stuck with them.
In this case with an AM3 I went from a Phenom II 955 to an FX8350
Previously on the AM2 I went from an Athlon X2 5200 to a Phenom 9950
Long before that I went from a K6-233 to a K6-2 333
And now I went from a Ryzen 3600X to a Ryzen 5800X.
Always buying later in life cycles trying to get the best performance upgrades for the price :)
As an I.T. guy tho, It would be impossible to list the amount of computers I have had growing up, many who I simply gifted or sold for super cheap. Something I do a lot of.
The sandy bridges are in my opinion some of the best most useful long lasting chips you can find. a good 1155 socket today will still perform, and sadly outperform the FX8350 for the vast majority of cases.
I went from a Phenom II 955 to an FX8350 too
I liked your content very good approach, i still dont belive why is this channel so underated ?
My fx6300 served me for 9 years. Certainly not the best but i could play all my games and they ran pretty well. Was about to switch to intel until i learned about ryzen (last few years i didnt follow pc tech etc) and chose that. Very happy with the 5 5600x. I think ill stick to team red a bit longer.
I am watching this using a Sabertooth 990FX with an FX8350 clocked to 4.4ghz paired with an RX580.
Its very impressive what old am3+ cpus can still do. I bought my partner a pc with an rx 560, fx 6300 and 8 gigs of ram. put another 8 gigs in and upgraded the rx 560 to a gtx 1660S and got her into pc gaming for less than 200 :)
I remember having a "4" core APU back in the day cause they were sold in cheap all-in-one PCs. Never had any complaints until I switched to an actual 4 core Haswell. The difference was night and day.
I 've got a 8350 running for more then 10 years as a home built NAS and Virtual Machine system with a debian OS as host and windows 7 as VM.
I still rock a AMD FX-8350 as my "test new OS" system.
I still have an 8350 system banging about here somewhere.
I have 5 systems sitting around my computer room with Fx-8350s in them. They all still run just fine. I have had no issues with any of them. I paired one of them up with an RX 6650 and it is a surprisingly "good" gaming system....depending on your game.
I had a laptop with an FX-9830P. It did its job, I was coming from an A6 and was happy to stop playing games at 20-25 fps. Don't miss it tho
While i never had an AMD processor until the 3950x, if my memory serves me correctly, the i7-980x amd 990x were not "desktop" processors, but HEDT with more CPU cores, more memory channels, and more PCIe lanes, half way between a normal desktop processor like the other i7 models and the 8350, and HPC processors like the Xeon 7550 or the 16 core Opteron(dont ask me the name because i never bothered to order one)
IIRC the i7-980 or 990x were the same as my pair of Xeon X5690, but only supported a single processor per board instead of my two, and possibly only supported 1066 instead of 1333 RAM
Now i'd personally argue that they werent HEDT but instead just trying to shrink the candy bar like Nvidia did with the GTX 10 series and RTX 40 series, where they sold you lower end cards, with higher brand names.
Take the 80 class Titan XP, or the 60 class 4070TI
used my from release till just 2 months ago, over 10 years of not upgrading.
Wow what did you upgrade to?
Back in 2012, software companies were only starting to learn how to program software for use with multi core CPUs. The AMD FX 8350 is still able to hold it's own when paired with a good GPU even in 2024.
I'm now moving from an FX 8350 to a 5900X after like 7-8 years on one, I don't see a downside until now, it's no longer punching thru on newer games.
I HAVE
FX 8150 BLACK EDITION RUNNING GTX 1660TI 6G DDR6 VERY PLEASED !!!
M.2 KINGSTON 7000 MBS
4 SSD RAID 0
INSANE SPEEDS SMOOTH GAMING.
FX 8350
THEN THE LEGEND
FX 9590 5G BLACK EDITION.
RTX 3060 12G O'CD
4 SSD M.2 CARD 4X 1T 7000 MBS
SUPER
PLEASED..
EYZEN 5 3600X MSI DRAGON
GTX 1080 TI 11G.
What an amazing cpu, back in the old days it was ridicule by Intel fanboy with their 4 core 8 thread cpu but at 4K it was beaten by the FX cpu lol
My 8350 is still running today. Just replaced it for a 7950x3d. I'll miss it. Survived a psu blow. A few upgrades. Excited to be moving on but also sad to leave it behind.
The FX8320 was the chip to buy, since it was 130$ a few months after release. That or the fx 6300 which was 90$ a few months after release.
My first build was a FX 6350, I ran it at 4.8GHZ for a time. The first few months at 5 ghz but had to clock it down to 4.8 after a year at @5GHZ. Before I went Ryzen I had to clock it at 4.4 GHZ for it to function at all.
Used a FX 6300 until ~2 years ago, it was mostly okay, perfect for everyday use and didn't bottleneck my 1050ti too much
I still use the 8350 on that exact Biostar motherboard! OC'd to 4.5GHz. Still runs every game I throw at it, albeit with some tweaks.
I think you should run the same tests vs the first gen i5 and i7s with the microcode mitigations against Spectre and Meltdown applied. A lot of Intel's performance gains back then were the result of cutting corners in their designing of those chips and the significant hit in performance they see after they're applied proves it.
This was my first custom build, I loved this CPU for how broke and ignorant I was at the time, I thought I was spitting on everything intel with this and my XFX 2GB AMD GPU
Friend of mine owns one. He still calls it an eight core but that's another debate. I remember buying Intel for gaming around this time period just based on performance.
Still running an FX on my home server. Not worth gaming anymore, but fine for storage work.
I'm stil running an fx 8230 with a gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 motherboard. GPU is a GTX 750 Ti. seems to serve me well with productivity and playing the old games
I ended up with an FX-8350 because I never really had the money to change platforms. I got a Phenom 2 x4 965 on a 790x mobo in 2009. I kept the rest of my old PC, just upgraded the core bits.
A few years later I upgraded the mobo to a 990x because I could use the 965 and same RAM. I had the plan to upgrade to the 8350 when I got the new mobo because getting the motherboard, then the CPU, then more RAM, and maybe eventually a new GPU, was more feasible than buying it all at the same time. Intel was just too expensive at the time. and I also *really* hated how quickly a platform was dropped. The fact that I could even consievably upgrade from the Deneb to Bulldozer was so much better than what was possible buying into Intel at the time.
In hindsight, if I could have found a way to go with the i5-2500k or 3570k I probably could have ridden that until Ryzen came out.
Intel overclock cost is high, since not only do you need the K processor which costs extra, you also need a chip set that will allow, another cost point. On AMD you could go with basic kit and tune a fair bit out of it. I still think long term mileage is better out of 8350 with overclock than 3570 without. I7 would have been an advantage though, a substantial one.
I'm curious why you only went with DDR3 1600 when the board supports DDR3 2400? My FX 9590 had no issues running DDR3 2400.
It's nice for an office machine
I'm still rocking an FX-6300, it's slow, but I can still play Forza Horizon 5 at around 60 fps, so not that bad. Still, I wanna upgrade to Ryzen in the near future.
nice test. but its nice to see sandy/ivy bridge in the chart too. i5 and i7.
I stil have mine in another build, still kicking.
For the price, this was never bad, especially after it dropped in price.
My rig was…
8350 @4.7g on that msi dragon mobo
32gb ram with a 128gb name on pcie a few years into its life. I think it’s the capability of taking up to 64gb of cheap Chinese ram that keeps its valuable. It was in the gorgeous fractal define s case and I donated it to my local makers space. So much regret now.
Weird memory compatibility issues you got there. I remembered running a G.Skill Trident X 2133mhz albeit on a FX-6300 just fine on the same Asus Crosshair Formula-Z. Would've been nice to know the difference in performance between a 1600mhz kit and the 2133mhz kit.
Yeah, really weird. I've own the cheapest AsRock 970 boards - every kit I've manually OC'd from 1600 would do 2133 or very close (with FSB) at 1.65V and none of the CPUs or boards struggled with that. In fact, every one of these cheap boards would do 2400 no problem - but my actual 2400 kit was 8GB, so I could never use it for that.
I still use mine daily as a gaming/entertainment and emulation rig. Does literally anything i throw at it up to ps3/xbox360 and even some newer stuff.
Overclock to 4.5ghz with a 1060 6gb 😂.
Easily handle any computer game at 1080p and even 4k in a lot of em.
Next computer will be a one of those mini boards with a 7840hs
I still use an FX6300 with MSI R9 7970 Lightning edition graphics and 8gb RAM. I would like to double the RAM when I get the chance, this pc does everything I want it to do, inlcuding playing World of Tanks at high settings.
I used my FX-8370E for YEARS with pleasure !
No regrets .
Amazingly informative video. I've still kept my Bulldozer and Piledriver chips as they were pretty decent chips (in that they were so cheap) and I look at them as a testament to how far AMD have come since those days. These chips were the first ones I had when I moved over from console gaming to PC gaming and they served me well for many years.
Going back to how far they've come, we can all appreciate how poor AMD were in their decision making back then however we must not forget that this was compounded by Intel who had (more or less since their inception) crushed them through various multi-million dollar litigations and advertising practices - for instance strong-arming retailers and manufacturers into using Intel chips over AMD's by literally paying them not to use them and using downright horrible tactics against AMD. Intel used to pay Dell $1 billion dollars a year not to use AMD and this really damaged their reputation.
It's a wonder that AMD survived all that, but now after all of that AMD are truly flourishing. I'm happy because technology and innovation is at the forefront which is better for the consumer.
Subscribed!
im still using FX8350 with corsair value 32GB 1.6ghz, Strix RX590 on a Gigabyte 970A-D3P Rev2. its all on auto OC with a Arctic Freezer A32 dual fan with MX6 paste installed in a high airflow chassis fractal core 2300. although i did keep the old pc and now using R7 5700X with Phantom RX5500XT 8GB, Corsair Vengeance 3.2ghz 64GB, MSI B450 Gaming Max Plus. im currently interested in buying the new RX7600XT.