Thanks for PlayStation Aus for sponsoring out todays video! Grab big discounts on PlayStation Studios games in the Steam Winter Sale here: bit.ly/483ujfT Get big discounts until Jan 5th on games like God of War, The Last of Us Part 1, Horizon Zero Dawn and more!
Why was the FX-8350 pitted against an 4th Generation Intel SKU anyways, 2nd or 3rd perhaps (as these were era specific) for a better comparison video that shills out completely in Intels favor. I remember when you called out Linus' results in relation to "your experience" with performance metrics with their portrayed Xeon results Bryan AND, well, honestly any overclock / undervault on that FX-8350 and it would have compared much more variably AND, even too the 4th gen i7 you utilised mate. Yes, the mobo was ass for it but any realistic purchase of an PC with an 8350 in it nowadays 2nd hand comes with "not ass" board generally as the BLACK chip was in part AMD's consumer king atm chip to market back then... Luv ya BUT, enough with the BS narratives, so, please do better and PEACE
5:50 - You can't conclude this with the tests you've done. The 8350's competitor back in the day was the i5, not the i7. The i5 will probably still win, but at least it would be a more interesting comparison, as the 8350 actually is slightly better at multithreading than the i5. The i7 dominated the 8350, even in multithreaded artificial benchmarks.I'm actually a bit more interested in the i3 vs 8350, to really push down the cores/threads on the intel side and see which works better for modern games, just for fun.
This is unfair comparison. i-7 4770 was much more expensive than FX-83xx in those days (at least double) . Even higher end i5 like 4570 was more expensive. Yet, in modern times these Intel quad cores without hyperthreading stutter like hell.
I have a question if it is possible to make new test with GPU with 16 PCIE Lanes? I am quite sure that can be responsible for stuttering in modern games.
I went from a Prescott Pentium 4 to a Sempron 140, to a FX 6100, to a Ryzen 5 3400G and now, to a Ryzen 5 5600X. It's been a long way, but I'm so happy with Zen 3 nowadays.
I bought the 5900x at launch. If I had to do it again I would have probably just got the 5800x but I have been using the 5900x for years now and it’s been fantastic and I have no urge to upgrade yet.
friend had a 8350 at the time and i had a 3570k... my frames were literally double in some places... made him hate amd for ever haha had a similar gpu as well...
Double the price (especially when including intels high motherboard bpricing at the time.) i7-2700 was intels 32nm 8thread direct competitor but it was $330 vs the FX-8350 [32nm] at $170
Maybe on games, but there are other things than gaming. I used a 8350 for 5 years, Running it at 4.8ghz. It was cheaper than an i5 build (if we factor in Mobo), and I was able to buy a better card because of the money I saved. For heavy allcore use, the AMD wasn't bad. I had a i7-6700, and even that wasn't that much faster. For gaming, sure, amd wasn't great, but for someone like me, who wasn't a heavy gamer, amd was actually a good, and cheap alternative. @@ThePgR777
Not to be pedantic, but the FX 8350 is called "Pile Driver". Bull dozer was the previous line of CPUs from 2011. Also, the 4060 is running in PCIe 2.0 on the FX 8350 and with 8 lanes at that. The FX 8350 might fair a little better with a 16x pcie GPU like the RX 5700X. It would raise those 1% lows more.
The desktop experience was definitely the biggest thing for me when I switched from FX to 4th gen Intel back in the day. It was insane to be so smooth when having videos or streams on in the background.
@@SaraMorgan-ym6ue No. Heat was an issue for both CPUs in my case, but I just undervolted and even underclocked them a little bit and it was fine for me.
@@010TheMaster010 They all do more given good enough cooling and a good board. Reach 4.7 Ghz that is. The 9590 is 4.7 Ghz with a 5 Ghz Turbo core but requires an FX chipset and a water cooler. FX 8350s hit 4.7 Ghz on air. Or I should say I have never came across one that could not on a 990X or 990FX board. On water, like a 9590, you can hit 5 Ghz all core. Can you push a 9590 to 5Ghz all core? Yes, but I wouldn't. Plenty of people have and it does work.
@@010TheMaster010They could be but in order to get the most out of them you needed to know how. As a matter of fact, during the time period, AMD would put out little bits about each platform and what it needed for best performance and they always drew the line at 990x and DDR3 1866 for the 8 core FX chips. For reference, the design was originally to rival Nehalem. Not Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge. Their target IPC WAS Nehalem. And as it so happens, these chips met their targets. Sadly they didn't get to market until Sandy Bridge, right before the Ivy Bridge launch.
I love the i7 4770, it's a meta CPU for budget flips in the UK. I paired it with an RTX 2060 for a flip which sold within 2 days👀 It also made for some good content too! Keep on with the budget content Bryan!
Too old for 2060s icl, 8400s are 35 in cex, 6700s are like under 50, h110s n h310s p much same price as b85 or h81, ddr4 is a couple quid cheaper per 8gb stick in cex too
Slight correction at the beginning; the 8320, 8350, and 9370 were all Piledriver. There are two chips that will forever have a special place in my heart, where a massive bulk of my content creation happened; the x6 1090T Black Edition on 970 mobo, and FX-8320 (that I OC'd to 4.7GHz at one point) on a 990FX mobo. Maybe neither were great for gaming, but in the video editing and music production space...man. I had my 8320 paired with a R9 290 at one point. Good times. I don't think I can ever part with them, so I have them stored away in some 3D printed hard cases. I basically stuck with the 8320 and R9 290, until I upgraded to an R7 2700X and GTX 1080 on a X470 board--which my niece now has, since I upgraded again last year.
There's only 1 chip that will stick in my mind...the q6600. I loved that build back in the day with a gtx 260be. It was relatively budget friendly without going low end.....these days you break the bank to get low/mid tier
@@XenaThreat- That's one that I never got. Poor motherboard choice at the time, when I wanted to upgrade to play Arkham Asylum. But from that socket/era, and before I went over to AMD, I had a Core2Duo E7500--overclocked that to 2.93GHz with an Arctic Freezer Pro. Such fun times!
@stephanieamare I still have my motherboard and ram from that build. I don't have the original board from that build as that was a p7n zilent and the northbridge fried on it so I had to replace it. I then done the lga 775 mod to fit a xeon x5460 in it
The MSI 970a SLI Krait Edition Motherboard PCI-E X16 slot is a Gen 2 as to the Lenovo IH81CE Motherboard PCI-E X16 slot is a Gen 3. Not sure how much of a difference this may cause in terms of bandwidth and latencies between both.
The stuttering was likely caused by the lack of PCI-Ev3 on the FX processor. It's even worse when you consider that the RTX 4060 only has 8 PCI-E lanes. You could check this by comparing the same GPU with i7 2nd gen (which is also 32nm process)
not really the stuttering is caused by the fact that those idiotic designed fx cpus have 1 FPU shared between 2 cores basically making it a bottlenecked af quad core cpu intel cpus have 1FPU per core making them way faster as the cores can take full advantage of their fpu and not have to wait for it to finish the job that the second core did give to it
@@dragos2010full1 how is it different from 4770 hyperthreading? For FX CPUs you can toggle one core per unit option making it 1 ALU 1 FPU, but i'm not sure would fix stutter issue
@@dragos2010full1FX architecture is its biggest bottleneck, but the 4060 running on PCIE 2.0 x8 likely didn't help, feeding the card only a quarter of the bandwidth it was designed for.
@@43079it's a little different. Hyper threading is a software solution. Latency on FX way higher because of the FPU, a physical design flaw. Didn't know it only had PCIe 2.0. Likely also a major issue for x8 GPUs. All the issues compound to a stuttery mess.
I still have my old FX 9590 and this video inspired me to fire it up which is something I haven’t done in a few years. It has a r9-290 GPU with it. The last time I gamed on it it was still able to hang in there and give a decent experience. As soon as all the updates finish I plan to check it out. Sadly it has to use WiFi and all I have to stick in it is an old N 150mbps USB card. I’m monitoring the CPU temp while it updates since it has an 11 year old 120mm Cooler Master AIO and so far it’s only touching 40C every so often. I’m very surprised given the age. I haven’t messed with in so long because I haven’t gotten around to getting a new AIO, but so far it doesn’t seem like it’s going to need one.
I would think it would be almost the same outcome as Intel just did minor refresh on chips for several generations. Windows never actually allowed AMD to stretch its legs until Ryzen plus. Many have seemed to of forgot how Microsoft was nailed for being the bad guy for years.
It's crazy how one year later my Fx 8350 I got for 10 USD with bent pins and a random Am3 motherboard from a thrift store, with a ziptied cooler as well as a GTX 660 is still playing my friends games to this day for under 30 bucks.
Same here lol. I noticed a lot of times when the 8xxx+ CPU is reviewed, it's on a mid-range motherboard without fine tuning. Granted, not everyone overclocks so there is nothing wrong with these kinds of tests, though I feel like the potential of these chips are often overlooked. When these chips are optimized, the stutters are DRASTICLY reduced. FX chips love ram speed with a bus overclock. Also hpet disabled appears to make a pretty big difference in some cases. Many times, the stutters are due to the CPU downclocking itself. It's not always because of overheating or VRMs -- lack of HPC mode/APM enabled/C&C can be a contributing factor. I have seen benchmarks where a reviewers 8xxx+ will dip in 40s/50s FPS on medium-ish settings (with random drops even below that), while I generally never dip below 60s with the same titles on high settings. I have a friend with Ryzen -- when they had a GTX 1060 running BL3, it was a choppy mess on mostly high settings 1440. Meanwhile, at the time I had a Vega56 with an optimized 8350, it felt nice and smooth with the same settings. Of course, once he upgraded his GPU, the game runs great for him now :P Just goes to show how far optimizing these CPUS can go.
Old Net/Sys Admin here... I was rocking a Phenom II X6 1100T BE until 2016. You got me into using used Xeons because I was looking for an I7 upgrade @ AMD prices (Ryzen was not available yet). I built an E5-2658 v3 in 2016 and it has served me well until now. Getting ready to build a Ryzen system now. With all the video transcoding I was doing in 2016 and prior, that poor 6-threaded/cored Phenom was struggling hard. Since 2016, my video processing has only increased. So, time for another upgrade.
What GPU is it? If it's an 8GB XT card, it could be the 5700 XT or 6600XT or similar, in which case the CPU is holding back the GPU quite a lot now. I don't know what games he plays, but for modern games the FX 8350 simply can't keep up at all - even if you get a playable average, the treacherous 1% lows really hurt a decent gaming experience, but for older games it can usually be acceptable. 8GB GPU would benefit a huge amount if they upgraded to an AM4 or AM5 system. The AM4 platform sells for very cheap these days - an example budget of $400, could get him a Sub $100 B550 mother board, $100 for 64GB of DDR4 Corsair ram (2 sticks), and $200 for the 5700X3D, which is simply incredible for gaming due to the 3D VCache. It's possible to even bring cost down to $300 if they went with a 32GB ram and a 5600X instead, and use the saved money to get a 1TB M.2 (say the Crucial P3 1TB for 57) and have some spare money for a decent cooler (like the Thermalright Peerless Assassin for $36). They could recycle their old power supply, storage, GPU, and _maybe_ cooling solution and Even though the AM4 platform is itself older now, it's legendary, parts on it will be amazing for years to come. Obviously if he wants he can stick with his old rig, but the upgrade options for him are really exciting and not too pricey these days.
@@HM-rz8nvif an FX can't bottleneck my Vega 64 it won't bottleneck a 5700XT / 6600XT. A properly tuned and set up FX will be able to drive those GPUs with ease.
When I built my first pc I thought about going with the 8350 but ended up with a 4690k for $20 more, I always heard the price of the FX was much better but I never saw that. Intel chip was barely any more money and did better, seems to have aged a lot better as well
Both CPUs were among the high end of their time. Personally I've put together an FX-8350 build all these years ago with Crosshair Formula Z , 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz and 2x480GB Corsair Force GT SSDs in RAID 0 and Corsair AIO over the CPU with the Corsair Ram Cooler over the dimms nicely sitting in a Corsair case from the era with plenty of space air flow and 6 Corsair LM120 fans to move that air around and all that powered by Corsair 750TX. The setup has changed few GPUs through the years and is now rocking an ROG GTX 1070 and the thing is still rock solid ! One thing that you forgot to mention about the FX platform is that it was super tunable and tweakable and thus why I have to disagree with the performance you've shown in this video. Even you've shown us on the channel before how to get way better performance with tweaking and optimising and you also know that the FX-8350 is capable of delivering way more than what you are showing here. Same can be said about the intel chip too ! My point is that out of the box intel performance was obviously better but with some time spent to tweak the FX , the gap can narrow a lot and even disappear in some instances however the AMD platform costed only fraction of the intel platform at the time. Both CPUs still rock solid for budget builds and it all comes down to price in my opinion
Nah I had a FX9590 and ngl after switching to Intel it was a night and day difference AMD FX is ass. When Ryzen came out I switched back to a Ryzen 3600 which is still playing good rn planning to get a 5600x to upgrade
Well ,excuse me Bryan but I feel that I have to defend a little the FX-8350(although I’ve always been an nVIDIA fan ,and I don’t really care about AMD or Intel ,but nevertheless … ) : 1)First of all , the FX-8350 is a “ *Vishera* ” architecture , *NOT* a “Bulldozer” 2)My brother used to love F1 2016 & F1 2017 , and back then I used a 4-core/4 thread intel i5-760. Those 2 games were stuttering badly , to the point that my brother couldn’t play competitive against other players(*and since he loved those games you can understand that we were having a serious issue there). I decided to build him an FX-8350 system instead , and all the stuttering was gone !! So , in my experience , the FX-8350 ,gave me a much better experience Vs the 4-core/4-thread i5 760. And yes , obviously anyone can say that the “Vishera” processor was released more than 1 year after the i5-760 ,but the i7-4770 was also released almost a year later than the FX-8350 , so none of those CPUs are directly comparable based on their release-date.
Great Video once again always love your content. I think part of the differing performance here might be the 8350's Lacking instruction sets as in it doesn't support AVX2 like the 4th gen intel does, which is pretty important in modern games. Games do not yet require the instruction set but you'll see better performance using hardware that supports it overall. I think a comparison between the 8350 and the i7 3770 which also lacked avx2 support would make for an interesting video or even or comparison between the 3770 and the 4770 to see the difference from instruction set support as in terms of ipc difference there isn't much there from being on the same 22nm process. Keep up the great work! You inspire me a lot and will be looking to make content in the tech space in the future. :D
I've dealt with a few 8320/50 machines lately. One was just a drop in replacement from an fx-4300 for my dad's email/internet/spreadsheet machine. Night and day what the extra cores do. Then I keep one around as my test machine...test server stuff before I do it mainstream or a win11 unsupported install, etc. Perfect for those things.
After starting from AMD FX 4100 in late 2012 to a AMD FX 8300 in Feb 2020 and hating so bad went to AMD 5600x in April 2021 it great for fortnite at 1440p +165fps no problems at all for all most two years now
It is a great test coming at it from today. If you get offered an FX or a Haswell, go with the haswell! Back in the day though, the 8350 came out before I7 3770 - and if you were on a budget a 63x0+board got you enough cores to game and could be had for half of what an i5+board cost.
A few years back, I bought two Dell SFF desktop PCs. One optiplex, one precision T1700. $50 each. I put an i5 in the Opti and a 1271v3 in the Precision. Now I sold the Optiplex for basically what I pad for it in parts as a favor WITH a low profile RX550. The Precision T1700 I kept for AGES and used an MSI 1650 low profile and it BURNED through PC titles EASILY. The 1271v3 was barely $60-70 back when a used 4770-4790 was $100-120. That system was made into a gift for a friend and is now happily running indie games and Baldur's Gate 3 with zero issues at 1080p.
Those are Vishera CPU's(aka Piledriver), the Bulldozer line has a 1 in the 2nd digit, ie the 8120 and 8150. I had both, and there is a significant difference, the ones you have here are the better choices. *edit note... the Piledriver CPU's work in AM3 motherboards, but they were designed for AM3+, using the 990FXA chipset. I got mine when they were new for about $150. The biggest difference is power. The AM3 have a 400hz serial link to power, the AM3+ have a 3400hz serial link. This allows for much faster power switching and delivery. But it also affected gameplay when using an NVidia GPU. I don't know why, but you had much better GPU performance with the AM3+ Like other people here I have both a 4770k and an 8350 in use today, but unlike them, my 8350 is an amazing system. Paired with a GTX970 I get 60fps average in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080 Medium. The 4770k can't run the game. 2nd edit* You would actually see the power decrease on that 8350 with a 990FXA mobo, simply because it has better power delivery. I may be a weird person here, but I don't usually build my pc based around a cpu, I build for the job I need starting with the mobo.
@@WarlockOvermind Silicon degradation. An unfortunate truth for Intel is that their CPU's degrade faster than AMD's. This system use to be the primary tech computer for a theater company until the onboard sound chip failed. It now lives as an office pc, attempts to game on it, anything that actually puts a load on the cpu is met with very uneven frame pacing leading to game breaking stuttering. JaysTwoCents had a video comparing 4770's to AMD FX and saw the same problem. This problem is horribly amplified in current gen Intel cpu's.
As an owner of 4770/90 as well as 8350 & 9370, I can tell you that the 4770/4790 walks ALL OVER the bulldozer chips, no matter the rest of the setup. I still use my 4790K almost daily. 😅
I'm using Dell Optiplex 9020 with the i7 4790K. The computer is 10 years old and still kicking. Using a GPU GTX 1660 super with 500w power supply, 16GB ram ddr3, 1TB SSD, and Also using Windows 10 pro 😅
@@addyyang5691 😂 Yep exactly! That 4790K is an absolute animal. I had that thing on liquid rock solid stable @4.8Ghz as my main rig for like 6-7 years. I finally upgraded it to play Black Desert Online better about 4 years back. I now have it on air at 4.4Ghz. never a single hiccup. 1660 with mine as well 😆.
On a 4790K and it brutalizes the FX 8000 series (forget the model) computer. I think even the high end 2600 series put up a fight. Intel had some good times laying out incremental updates until AMD curbstomped the scene with Ryzen.
Happy holidays to you Bryan. From the title I expect the FX to be not that good by the Intel 4th gen. I got to PCs around that time and from what I remember from the time and the years since FX hasn't aged well especially compared to the Intel 4th gen Core series. FX had more "cores" but far weaker ones. Good thing they turned around with Ryzen. Imma see if I was right by the end of the video.
Yep was right and that power consumption by the FX system is just bad considering it was performing a lot less. The mention of the Xeon E3 1230 V3 instead of the i7 4770 made me chuckle a bit since I done the same thing since the i7 4770 was about 20 USD more than the Xeon equivalents in my area so I got myself a Xeon E3 1240 V3 and it works pretty nicely. Comparing said Xeon and my Ryzen 5 2600 the Xeon is close to being 2/3 of the performance which is interesting but at the same time kinda expected since Ryzen 1000 and 2000 weren't as performant as later generations.
Back in 2013, my first gen i3 550 was a bit too slow and i wanted to finally upgrade my GT 220 to a proper GPU, the GTX 660. Money was tight and my older brother was an AMD CPUs fanboy(he still is), so he made me jump platforms from Intel and get the FX 6300. That was the worst decision i ever made when it comes to PCs and in 2015 i went back to Intel, with an i5 4690k. I couldn't believe how much better and smoother the experience was. I'm glad Ryzen was such an amazing turnaround for AMD, im very pleased so far with the 3600 and recently the 5700x
At one time, had a desktop with an 8350FX with a GTX970 and a notebook with an i7 4210HQ with a GTX860M. Those two systems were extremely close in performance. Either one could handle the games I was playing or rip to FLAC or whatever else. It wasn't my intent to do that but it happened. I still have the i7 notebook running strong but it is absolutely stomped flat by the Ryzen 5800X/6700XT desktop I have now.
my first serious gaming PC had an 8350 in it, along with 770 4gb cards in SLI. That didn't last long. I went 4790k and used that system until 2018, when I put a 1070 in it and used it for another year. 4th gen i7s really held up.
I built my first ground-up PC around the FX-8350 and an R9-270X graphics card. Later I bought an R9-290, then a pair of them in Crossfire, trying to get more performance from a CPU that was OC'd to 4.8 Ghz but still struggling. That final version was named _Spaceheater,_, and it deserved the moniker. My eventual upgrade from the FX-8350 machine was to a Core i7 6850K, a 6-core, 12-thread, quad-channel, HEDT beast, with a 980Ti, then a pair of them, on a custom liquid loop. Sort of a reward for having tolerated my earlier error for a couple of years.
well i use for long time fx cpus . no stuttering in desktop and smooth gameplay with an r9 280 and 1080p . so i can 't confirm your testing in this way
For best performance with the FX chips lol you should really replace thermal pads on the motherboard under all the heat sinks and replacement paste it helps a lot when your VRAM is not overheating on the motherboard or the north bridge and Southbridge are not overheating it can make a difference to performance when the motherboard is not overheating.
I think the big nail in the coffin for the amd fx cpu was it's instruction sets. The Haswell is still VERY modern since it was the first avx2 cpu series. Back in the day that didn't seem like such a big deal but now it's kind of commonly expected that a cpu will have avx2 so games demand it more. yeah it's performance was always behind the intel, but not 20x weaker, that's got to be from the FX's outdated instructions. It's a shame AMD deliberately chose to keep the AM3 so outdated and progress the bulldozer on other platforms to eventually excavator with avx2. I'd have loved to see an AMD 8 excavator core cpu (yes I know technically the first excavator avx2 cpus were am4).
This is an aplles to oranges comparison. When I built a system at that time I could get either current gen i3(2c/4thr)/previous gen lower i5(4c/4thr or smth) or FX6300(6cores) for almost the same price. The FX6300 lasted for 5 years in my system and I haven't had any complaints or regrets on my desicion. all current gen i5/i7 were more than double the price. so, for a correct comparison, you should benchmark 2 cpu's with the same MSRP
Maybe something with your configuration . Tried fx8320 last year and for me desktop usage with Samsung 850 Evo and mismatch 20gb of 1333mhz ddr3 was perfectly fine ... What was not fine was heat generation and PCI 2.0 bootleneck . Tried on windows 11
Didn't the i7-4770 get released about 2 years later than the FX-8350? Wouldn't the i7-2600 be a better comparison? From memory that would drop it pretty close the the FX chip. I was thinking you were just comparing price for price, but then you mentioned The 4770 cost $50 and the 8350 you pay max $15. Let's be honest though, if you have either of these, it might be time to start saving for an upgrade.
Amd really turned the tables. I went from a 9900k to a 7800x3d. From that comparison youd think intel was the one making the power robbing heat sources the whole time
I got an 8350 for $60 in like 2013 or 2015 and then got a $100 class action settlement for it. So it cost me -$40. Best price to performance ratio ever! It replaced the FX4100 that I got for $10 on an amazon pricing error.
Your board has a weak vrm power delivery system. For 8core FX you need motherboard with 10 or more "phase" power. You didnt check the clocks of the cpu during your tests, especially during lags. The standard behavior of a mobo, with weak cpu power delivery system that overheats, is to drop clocks of the cpu to 1600MHz and voltages to 1.000volts for some seconds in order to keep up with the heat. I would run this test again with a better motherboard just for consistency. Back in the days I replaced (sold) 3 motherboards for the FX to stay at 100% 1) Asrock 980DE U3S3 (4+1 phase power) it kept up for about 3 minutes full power before it started throttle. Asrock sent me 3 different bios files trying to fix the problem. Every time (file) it was worse. Finally they offered me a free replacement with the next: 2) Asrock 970 extreme 3 (also 4+1 phase power) and the throttling was much worse than the previous motherboard. Being tired of the situation they offered me the option to pay a small fee of 20euros and replace the motherboard with 990FX Extreme9 wich is a 12+2 power phase motherboard. Because I had to wait for about a month for the motherboard to be available again (It was then out of stock) i asked them to refund me the motherboard, something they did. 3) Gigabyte 990XA-UD3 Rev 3.0 with is a 8+2 phase power motherboard. The board again throttled less than the Asrock 980DE U3/S3 but it again throttled. I had to try to make it throttle with prime 95 (maximum heat option) but again throttled. I kept it for 2-3 years like that for productivity tasks. I then sold it. When removed it I noticed darkening and bulging of the pcb under vrms close to the northbridge. The motherboard is bought by my pc technician who is still using it with an Fx8350 as his main workshop pc. 4) MSI 970 Gaming : The final! With 6+2 power phases and the heatsink over vrm attached tightly with metal screws over a backplate it finaly managed to pass the prime95 test with a top down cooler. I forgot to mention that all of the above mobos was only usable when the fan from the cpu cooler blow air on top of the vrm heatsink. So i used only the stock cooler. But no overclocking past stock voltage was possible because of throttling. So i kept it stock clocks and voltages until today that I casually use it for backup tasks (raid 10). It took me 4 motherboards and a lot of experimentation to make the FX8350 perform as it should. I would like to see you try with a better motherboard.
I Bulldozer was price competitive to the i5 line, like the great i5-2500K. Both oc well, easily get i5-2500k@4.2GHz and fx-8350@4.6GHz (I could do 4.8GHz too.) The fight of 4-BigCores vs 8-littleCores was the contest. Please try the i7 without HyperThreading to see the contest it was to be "better" than. (Note: the 4770 was worth over double the 8350.)
The FX-8350 was not marketed or sold against the i7. It was pitted against the i5 in the same price bracket, and is 12 years old at this point. And while not obvious years ago, it was more future proof than the 4c/4t i5 processors, let alone the i3 and Pentium. It became more evident with DX 12 titles that have rendering issues on 4c/4t processors, and anything that actually did lean on more than 4c/4t, especially concerning frame times. Performance on games optimized for single core/thread performance still ran more than fine on FX. The older 4th gen and prior i7 4c/8t processors themselves were very future proof, but also much more expensive. The launch price of the 3770 was $80 more than the FX-8350, and the 4770 was $110 more here in the US. So basically not even remotely in the same price/performance bracket, so it ends up being an apples to oranges comparison. It's going to be moot eventually though as more games get released that use AVX2 instead of AVX. No one at this point should be doing budget builds based on FX or 3rd gen and prior i7. 4th gen i7 should be the minimum going forward as of this year.
Great info as always. I scored two I7-4790's for $50 US shipped and have a 3rd one in my old HPZ 230 with a GTX 1060 and it runs fine and are really good bargains. I7-4770"s can be had in old HP Elite machines out here for cheap too. Thanks for the tip on the Xeon E3 1230 v3. Happy New Year to you and yours.
My daughter is still running an old system I salvaged with a 4770 in it and an also ancient GTX 960. Nothing fancy or exciting, but the price was right. (Free/hand-me-down/old bits laying around my scrap pile.)
At the time yes the FX 8350 was the better deal. I Purchased an FX 8350 for about $100 new back in 2014/15 and current i7s were going for about twice that price. I used that platform until about 2018 with a GTX 780ti and AC Origins was still running on that platform. I didn't run across any game that wouldn't play at reasonable settings on that platform before I sold it. If you get 4 or 5 years out of a platform for half the price of the alternative, you're winning. If I had gone Intel I would have had to upgrade my entire platform the same way I did the AMD after 4 years, so it was a wash in the end and I got to enjoy some great games. Plus, current Windows 10 doesn't play well with older AMD. With all of the updates, this isn't the same Windows 10 that we ran when this platform was fresh.
Seiing this and then knowing how my 5800X3D performs, it's almost astonishing how far AMD has come in 10 years. Yes that's a long time, like basically middle schooler me vs uni graduate me today, but in chip timescales it's actually not a lot. Its also incredible how little Intel has innovated in those 10 years besides mostly just adding more cores and raising the clocks.
I still have my FX 8350. In fact, I still run it on a Asrock 970 M Pro 3 mother board with a NVMe SSD in the PCIe slot with a RX 580 GB. I have windows 10 booting from the PCIe nvme SSD, it's a 1tb Samsung Gen 3 970 Evo plus with 32 GB of 1866 MHZ RAM occupying all 4 slots. I'm going to install Linux on it and keep it running for another 3 years just because I can. Long live pile driver!
To me 2nd and 4th gen Intel processors were some of the best they ever made. I still have a mini pc with a 4th gen that i keep as a spare in case something wrong happens to my main PCs. 4th gen is still perfectly usable to this day. Back then i had an FX 6300 and while it was decent,an i5 4570 still felt way better even in basic tasks
i used a 4790 all the way up until last year lol. the value i got out of that cpu was crazy... every year it just kept giving and giving. haswell was one of my favourite lines ever and favourite go to for refurb/budget builds.
Yes bulldozer was worse than the equivalent Intel cpu, but you fail to tell your audience that the actual competitor is the Intel i7-3770. It’s kind of unfair to compare bulldozer to a generation newer Intel cpu. The results would be much closer compared to the 3770
The FX8350 is still great and can compete (in games) with the 4770. But the real "magic" is when you put all the thermal headroom into overclocking Hypertransfer, Northbridge and RAM. This is something the i7 4770 and a B or H series board can't do. Almost all 1600C9 sticks will do 2133C11 and almost all the CPUs will do 2600 NB. This improves performance in games significantly. Unfortuantely, most people just overclock the core, which does almost nothing. You can and should still do 4.4 or 4.5 all core at 1.45V or so, but save the thermal headroom for where it matters.
Your speaking facts north bridge, ram and hyper transfer definitely do the most I had a golden chip back in the day that could hit 5ghz all core at 1.45 and it performed much better at 4.7ghz mostly bus oced with the northbridge pushed to 2831mhz and ddr3 2466mhz with lowered timings then pushing the hyper transfer 100mhz over stock on sabertooth board for 5400MT/s more than ramping up core clocks helping alleviate the module bottleneck works much better
My first pc in 2016 was a FX 6300. It ran very hot but it introduced me into the pc gaming world so it will always have a place in my heart. Now I have a 5800x3d and love it! I will stick with AMD in the future if they keep doing what they are doing!
got a question for you, Mr. Yes. You mentioned an OEM lenovo board that you adapted but how did you stop the OEM errors? I have a Dell optiplex 7020 MT that keeps spitting out rear fan failure warnings because there is none. Is there any solution? Thank you and Happy Holidays to you!
Nice video, but I have fun with my fx 8320, cause all stotter was deletet with changing to nvme ssd, cause the boards on board components were garbage without tweaking, especially the ssd controller. that caused stuttering. I got rid of it. I am lucky that my board has pcie 3, so it still holds its ground in most games. But bulldozer does not have more cores. It has 4 fpus not 8, so how should it improve?😂
Funny, I got a Gigabyte Z87-D3HP for $28 shipped from an estate sale. I then bought a $39 i7 4770k from UCW through Jawa. It boots but I have it back in the box until I am ready to deal with it. $67 netted me the 3rd to last chip & board i'd recommend for entry level. It goes i7 4770, i7 4790, i7 4770k, i7 4790k. I'd include the i7 5775c but as you know it's cost prohibitive. Edit: I do give out i5 Haswells to children looking to play Minecraft and Roblox as they work fine with those games. I do not sell them though, Anything i5 haswell and under goes out free. that includes Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge and Nehalem. Unless laptop. That goes by a case to case basis. You know, whether it has a dGPU or not.
Tech Yes City my maan used to watch you back in the day, when you were just starting out and actually changed your name but reversed it back :D, I dont know if its me but youve goten a bit older :D keep these amazing videos up nontheless ^)^
Some 4060s come with an x8 interface. If you put that in the PCIe 2.0 socket of the FX it would be near useless. Very slow. Whatever you put in there needs the full x16 interface. I do not know which one you used so I can't tell if it's more than just the chip sucking.
@@niezzayt3809 Not exactly the moral of the story. If one does one's research, one can bypass some of the headaches that come with PC building. You do not need a full x16 if you have a PCIe gen 4 connector. But once you start lowering the bandwidth by lowering the connector to PCIe 3 or 2? You are throttling the card. It becomes bandwidth starved and your 1% and .1% lows take a HUGE dip. With these older boards you want to max out with RTX 2xxx series. In this case I would say a 2070 or 2080. 2080 Ti would be overkill but just like my GTX 1080 and these other cards I have suggested, it'll allow you to play older games in 4K pushing the majority of the heavy lifting onto the GPU. Edit: Almost forgot the Vega cards. They would be good here too but with driver support waning I am not sure if you should go that way.
makes more sense to compare the 3770 than the 4770 since they are from roughly the same time. Memory also makes a huge difference on both chips to be honest. 8350 also have a lot of room to undervolt, overclock or both. Usually a solid -0.50mv and 200-400mhz for free on each one. The stock 4.0 Ghz could be ran a solid -0.75mv on the worst of the worst samples. They were heavily overvolted, getting more out of it takes about the same effort as XMP.
I don't have the exact same i7, I have two of the i7-4710HQ in laptops from about 2014. I stopped using them back in 2019-2020, but not because the CPU performance was too bad.
Ok, Brian the cpu had issues with scheduler if you remember there is a tool for turning off core parking on AMD 8000 series. Also I had better results with Lows and also OC using a 1.3v underclock on the cores. Remember win10 and win 11 had alot of introductions to parking and scheduling for cpus that continued a certain design which AMD and Intel both dont use, Intel not at all and AMD not since zen came out..... Note on the core parking issue windows 7, 8, and 8.1 release a KB update to address that performance issue. Its most likely not in win10 or newer. I use both intel and AMD so im not a AMD shill but know that the OS during that cpu operations had modifications. Also a chipset update for it was released as well around that time. The AMD cpu 8000 and 9000 series sadly was a good thought on paper but needed software to match the architecture which AMD didnt have market share so why should they. If they did im sure it would of been different in even more higher performance and to be honest might of been the fabric of the design for ryzen because it was a shared cache and Int cores tied to a main core so who knows.
@@saricubra2867 Intel jumped from 10nm to 4nm and their 6+8+2 core Meteor Lake performs worse than a 6+8 core Raptor Lake chip on the same wattage while being more expensive to make, it's a disaster for them.
Someone brought me a PC to fix with an 8350 in it that was having problems. I got everything sorted, but I was curious how well it performed, and the 8350 was more than a slight bottleneck to the even the 1650 they had installed. And that system even had a nice Asus 990FX mobo.
The fx result on fortnite is so odd. Maybe it has something to do with the new season or dx12, because when I tested the fx 6300 with a gtx 750 ti, it got 60fps using dx11
Used to own an AMD 8350, my first OC. It was a heat monster! haha! But it was fun! Would be nice to see how it behaves in productivity benchmarks, DaVinci Resolve especially since I'm working with it on my current Ryzen 5900X build. Would be nice to see the difference.
The FX-8350 came out in October 2012, with speed bump variants coming out throughout 2013 (FX-9370 in June 2013) and even as late as 2014 (FX-8370 came out in September 2014). The i7 4770K came out in June 2013. These chips very much existed in about the same time period as each other.
@@cardboardsnail The 8300 series aka the pile driver was released at the same time as the 3rd gen. It was the fx 9000 series that was released a year later which are just an overclocked version of the piledriver without really tweak or architectural improvements.
I have three systems using the i7 4770K, 4790, and 7700k paired with RTX 3060Ti's. They are awesome chips that still do massive work. Great for emulators, couch gaming, moderate gaming.
Just to add something please be aware that the 970 boards had issues with the 8350s and all similar CPUs, vrm gets to hot and it causes issues , can you try just the worst case on the low FPS with a fan on the vrm?. I had a 8150 ages ago at 5ghz and a 990 formula z board. Also they can run fast ram easy.
It's funny. I actually watched your videos back in 2012 and it was why I bought an 8350 :P It was like a $500 gaming pc build video or something lol. I don't think you're innocent on the 8350 either.
I had an 8120 and I upgraded it for a 4790K . Upgraded that to a 9700K Upgraded that to a 7800x3d . My little brother still uses the 4790K in a workstation he uses for a DAW !
Really bad idea pairing fx with a nvidia card, driver overhead here the main issue ,next time u should try on both an amd card for surely closing the gap between the two
It's more the architecture than the cores that's being compared here. The FX 8350 used a terrible architecture that shared critical resources across each 'module' which AMD considered 2 cores while in reality each module was closer to a single core with dual threads. I look at the FX series CPU's as quad cores with hyperthreading, not a true 8 core. If you really want to do a core count comparison, I'd use the newer Ryzen series to do it. Or you could compare older Intel quads like the 4770 to newer CPUs like the 8700k or 9900k to see how more cores affects the results. That would be a better core count comparison.
I still use the FX-8350 for GTA V RP, and Racing Sim, it doesn't disappoint me. Paired with RX570 8gb, and 24gn of RAM. The only negative thing is that the PC only has HDD, but it's not very slow.
I've got a ud7-990fxa v1.1 from gigabyte, a fx6100 and a fx9370, and I can run vfio-pci passthrough with my hd6770, gt1030, and rx580 while running a 16x pcie card with 6 controllers and a mux on it connected to zfs arrays of ssds, and still have room for two more addin cards (I was testing some optane nvme cards last year) They werent the best chips ever made, but the platform was phenomenal for the time and it was SO much cheaper than trying to get Intel+iommu and more than 4 cores My workstation is still running today. It gets tricked into booting in uefi mode, launches zfsbootmenu, decrypts my root zfs arrays, and boots (currently) into a custom Ubuntu Noble 24.04 install
Thanks for PlayStation Aus for sponsoring out todays video! Grab big discounts on PlayStation Studios games in the Steam Winter Sale here: bit.ly/483ujfT
Get big discounts until Jan 5th on games like God of War, The Last of Us Part 1, Horizon Zero Dawn and more!
Why was the FX-8350 pitted against an 4th Generation Intel SKU anyways, 2nd or 3rd perhaps (as these were era specific) for a better comparison video that shills out completely in Intels favor. I remember when you called out Linus' results in relation to "your experience" with performance metrics with their portrayed Xeon results Bryan AND, well, honestly any overclock / undervault on that FX-8350 and it would have compared much more variably AND, even too the 4th gen i7 you utilised mate. Yes, the mobo was ass for it but any realistic purchase of an PC with an 8350 in it nowadays 2nd hand comes with "not ass" board generally as the BLACK chip was in part AMD's consumer king atm chip to market back then...
Luv ya BUT, enough with the BS narratives, so, please do better and PEACE
5:50 - You can't conclude this with the tests you've done. The 8350's competitor back in the day was the i5, not the i7. The i5 will probably still win, but at least it would be a more interesting comparison, as the 8350 actually is slightly better at multithreading than the i5. The i7 dominated the 8350, even in multithreaded artificial benchmarks.I'm actually a bit more interested in the i3 vs 8350, to really push down the cores/threads on the intel side and see which works better for modern games, just for fun.
This is unfair comparison. i-7 4770 was much more expensive than FX-83xx in those days (at least double) . Even higher end i5 like 4570 was more expensive. Yet, in modern times these Intel quad cores without hyperthreading stutter like hell.
these delusional amd fanboys cant give it up even a decade later
I have a question if it is possible to make new test with GPU with 16 PCIE Lanes?
I am quite sure that can be responsible for stuttering in modern games.
I'm so glad AMD turned it around with their Ryzen series. I love my 5900X.
Yes I upgraded from 8350 to 7600
5600 here.. my buddy has a 7700. Zen really kicks ahhh booty
Absolute monster cpu I love mine. With my rtx 3080
I went from a Prescott Pentium 4 to a Sempron 140, to a FX 6100, to a Ryzen 5 3400G and now, to a Ryzen 5 5600X. It's been a long way, but I'm so happy with Zen 3 nowadays.
I bought the 5900x at launch. If I had to do it again I would have probably just got the 5800x but I have been using the 5900x for years now and it’s been fantastic and I have no urge to upgrade yet.
The 4770 cost 50% more than the 8350 and MB were also more expensive. The direct competitor price wise at launch was the i5 3570K.
3570K would still perform better than the 8350
friend had a 8350 at the time and i had a 3570k... my frames were literally double in some places... made him hate amd for ever haha had a similar gpu as well...
Double the price (especially when including intels high motherboard bpricing at the time.)
i7-2700 was intels 32nm 8thread direct competitor but it was $330 vs the FX-8350 [32nm] at $170
@@ThePgR777 at the time of release yes
Maybe on games, but there are other things than gaming. I used a 8350 for 5 years, Running it at 4.8ghz. It was cheaper than an i5 build (if we factor in Mobo), and I was able to buy a better card because of the money I saved. For heavy allcore use, the AMD wasn't bad. I had a i7-6700, and even that wasn't that much faster. For gaming, sure, amd wasn't great, but for someone like me, who wasn't a heavy gamer, amd was actually a good, and cheap alternative. @@ThePgR777
Not to be pedantic, but the FX 8350 is called "Pile Driver". Bull dozer was the previous line of CPUs from 2011. Also, the 4060 is running in PCIe 2.0 on the FX 8350 and with 8 lanes at that. The FX 8350 might fair a little better with a 16x pcie GPU like the RX 5700X. It would raise those 1% lows more.
The desktop experience was definitely the biggest thing for me when I switched from FX to 4th gen Intel back in the day. It was insane to be so smooth when having videos or streams on in the background.
did you delid the cpu to make it run cooler?
@@SaraMorgan-ym6ue No. Heat was an issue for both CPUs in my case, but I just undervolted and even underclocked them a little bit and it was fine for me.
Isn't the 8350 Vishera which improves on many of the issues with Bulldozer? I know I personally ran the FX-8350 until 2020, and I never had issues.
Same boat but fx 8320 and I still miss it to this day
The 9 series FX chips require the 990FX boards. It is so not worth owning when you can easily OC an 8350 past it.
9590s were (supposed to be) guaranteed 5ghz chips though, which 8350/8300s didn't always hit
@@010TheMaster010 They all do more given good enough cooling and a good board. Reach 4.7 Ghz that is. The 9590 is 4.7 Ghz with a 5 Ghz Turbo core but requires an FX chipset and a water cooler. FX 8350s hit 4.7 Ghz on air. Or I should say I have never came across one that could not on a 990X or 990FX board. On water, like a 9590, you can hit 5 Ghz all core. Can you push a 9590 to 5Ghz all core? Yes, but I wouldn't. Plenty of people have and it does work.
They're even less worth owning when no OC in the world stops them from getting clowned by a $3 Haswell Xeon.
@@Trick-Framed if you know what you're doing sure, but these were marketed as plug and play
@@010TheMaster010They could be but in order to get the most out of them you needed to know how. As a matter of fact, during the time period, AMD would put out little bits about each platform and what it needed for best performance and they always drew the line at 990x and DDR3 1866 for the 8 core FX chips.
For reference, the design was originally to rival Nehalem. Not Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge. Their target IPC WAS Nehalem. And as it so happens, these chips met their targets. Sadly they didn't get to market until Sandy Bridge, right before the Ivy Bridge launch.
I love the i7 4770, it's a meta CPU for budget flips in the UK. I paired it with an RTX 2060 for a flip which sold within 2 days👀 It also made for some good content too! Keep on with the budget content Bryan!
Too old for 2060s icl, 8400s are 35 in cex, 6700s are like under 50, h110s n h310s p much same price as b85 or h81, ddr4 is a couple quid cheaper per 8gb stick in cex too
isn't that a huge bottleneck
@@Cr0frogI'm pretty sure he either knows that or doesn't care
@@thelonelyghost285he bought what he could afford big deal...
@@slaydog5102 damn, what's with the attitude
Slight correction at the beginning; the 8320, 8350, and 9370 were all Piledriver.
There are two chips that will forever have a special place in my heart, where a massive bulk of my content creation happened; the x6 1090T Black Edition on 970 mobo, and FX-8320 (that I OC'd to 4.7GHz at one point) on a 990FX mobo. Maybe neither were great for gaming, but in the video editing and music production space...man. I had my 8320 paired with a R9 290 at one point. Good times. I don't think I can ever part with them, so I have them stored away in some 3D printed hard cases.
I basically stuck with the 8320 and R9 290, until I upgraded to an R7 2700X and GTX 1080 on a X470 board--which my niece now has, since I upgraded again last year.
There's only 1 chip that will stick in my mind...the q6600. I loved that build back in the day with a gtx 260be. It was relatively budget friendly without going low end.....these days you break the bank to get low/mid tier
@@XenaThreat- That's one that I never got. Poor motherboard choice at the time, when I wanted to upgrade to play Arkham Asylum. But from that socket/era, and before I went over to AMD, I had a Core2Duo E7500--overclocked that to 2.93GHz with an Arctic Freezer Pro. Such fun times!
@stephanieamare I still have my motherboard and ram from that build.
I don't have the original board from that build as that was a p7n zilent and the northbridge fried on it so I had to replace it. I then done the lga 775 mod to fit a xeon x5460 in it
The MSI 970a SLI Krait Edition Motherboard PCI-E X16 slot is a Gen 2 as to the Lenovo IH81CE Motherboard PCI-E X16 slot is a Gen 3. Not sure how much of a difference this may cause in terms of bandwidth and latencies between both.
The stuttering was likely caused by the lack of PCI-Ev3 on the FX processor. It's even worse when you consider that the RTX 4060 only has 8 PCI-E lanes. You could check this by comparing the same GPU with i7 2nd gen (which is also 32nm process)
not really the stuttering is caused by the fact that those idiotic designed fx cpus have 1 FPU shared between 2 cores basically making it a bottlenecked af quad core cpu intel cpus have 1FPU per core making them way faster as the cores can take full advantage of their fpu and not have to wait for it to finish the job that the second core did give to it
@@dragos2010full1 how is it different from 4770 hyperthreading? For FX CPUs you can toggle one core per unit option making it 1 ALU 1 FPU, but i'm not sure would fix stutter issue
@@dragos2010full1FX architecture is its biggest bottleneck, but the 4060 running on PCIE 2.0 x8 likely didn't help, feeding the card only a quarter of the bandwidth it was designed for.
@@43079it's a little different. Hyper threading is a software solution. Latency on FX way higher because of the FPU, a physical design flaw. Didn't know it only had PCIe 2.0. Likely also a major issue for x8 GPUs. All the issues compound to a stuttery mess.
@@43079 Those intel cores were much faster than amd's. Just look at what the sandy bridge was doing to it even though it was 2 years older.
Why are you comparing the 8350 against the 4770 that came out a year later, and not the 3570k from the same year and at the same price?
Absolutely love the comparison! I kind of expected that even with the recent multicore optimization these FXs wouldn't have come back to shine lol
A decade later and Tech YES still pumpin out quality content.
Not only is your commemt first, but also first W first comment that doesn't say "first"
Not to mention on some of the old boy hero chips too. Always a good watch
Did you run the 4th gen or FX-8350 back in the day?
@@techyescity 8350. Got free AM3 boards from Newegg.
Marco: a legendary RUclipsr in his own right.
I still have my old FX 9590 and this video inspired me to fire it up which is something I haven’t done in a few years. It has a r9-290 GPU with it. The last time I gamed on it it was still able to hang in there and give a decent experience. As soon as all the updates finish I plan to check it out. Sadly it has to use WiFi and all I have to stick in it is an old N 150mbps USB card. I’m monitoring the CPU temp while it updates since it has an 11 year old 120mm Cooler Master AIO and so far it’s only touching 40C every so often. I’m very surprised given the age. I haven’t messed with in so long because I haven’t gotten around to getting a new AIO, but so far it doesn’t seem like it’s going to need one.
Cool to see vid on AM3+ platform! FX series and 2nd Gen Intel holds some nostalgia to me. I wonder how it would perform with 2nd Gen Intel 🤔
I would think it would be almost the same outcome as Intel just did minor refresh on chips for several generations. Windows never actually allowed AMD to stretch its legs until Ryzen plus. Many have seemed to of forgot how Microsoft was nailed for being the bad guy for years.
It's crazy how one year later my Fx 8350 I got for 10 USD with bent pins and a random Am3 motherboard from a thrift store, with a ziptied cooler as well as a GTX 660 is still playing my friends games to this day for under 30 bucks.
I still use FX 8350. Only drawback is moderately large power consumption. Other vice why would I update.
Same here lol. I noticed a lot of times when the 8xxx+ CPU is reviewed, it's on a mid-range motherboard without fine tuning. Granted, not everyone overclocks so there is nothing wrong with these kinds of tests, though I feel like the potential of these chips are often overlooked. When these chips are optimized, the stutters are DRASTICLY reduced. FX chips love ram speed with a bus overclock. Also hpet disabled appears to make a pretty big difference in some cases. Many times, the stutters are due to the CPU downclocking itself. It's not always because of overheating or VRMs -- lack of HPC mode/APM enabled/C&C can be a contributing factor. I have seen benchmarks where a reviewers 8xxx+ will dip in 40s/50s FPS on medium-ish settings (with random drops even below that), while I generally never dip below 60s with the same titles on high settings. I have a friend with Ryzen -- when they had a GTX 1060 running BL3, it was a choppy mess on mostly high settings 1440. Meanwhile, at the time I had a Vega56 with an optimized 8350, it felt nice and smooth with the same settings. Of course, once he upgraded his GPU, the game runs great for him now :P Just goes to show how far optimizing these CPUS can go.
Old Net/Sys Admin here... I was rocking a Phenom II X6 1100T BE until 2016. You got me into using used Xeons because I was looking for an I7 upgrade @ AMD prices (Ryzen was not available yet). I built an E5-2658 v3 in 2016 and it has served me well until now. Getting ready to build a Ryzen system now. With all the video transcoding I was doing in 2016 and prior, that poor 6-threaded/cored Phenom was struggling hard. Since 2016, my video processing has only increased. So, time for another upgrade.
My son is still using a FX8350 w 24gb of ram and a 8gb XT GPU. It runs alot of game really well. its been solid gaming for close to 10 years.
What GPU is it? If it's an 8GB XT card, it could be the 5700 XT or 6600XT or similar, in which case the CPU is holding back the GPU quite a lot now. I don't know what games he plays, but for modern games the FX 8350 simply can't keep up at all - even if you get a playable average, the treacherous 1% lows really hurt a decent gaming experience, but for older games it can usually be acceptable. 8GB GPU would benefit a huge amount if they upgraded to an AM4 or AM5 system.
The AM4 platform sells for very cheap these days - an example budget of $400, could get him a Sub $100 B550 mother board, $100 for 64GB of DDR4 Corsair ram (2 sticks), and $200 for the 5700X3D, which is simply incredible for gaming due to the 3D VCache.
It's possible to even bring cost down to $300 if they went with a 32GB ram and a 5600X instead, and use the saved money to get a 1TB M.2 (say the Crucial P3 1TB for 57) and have some spare money for a decent cooler (like the Thermalright Peerless Assassin for $36).
They could recycle their old power supply, storage, GPU, and _maybe_ cooling solution and Even though the AM4 platform is itself older now, it's legendary, parts on it will be amazing for years to come.
Obviously if he wants he can stick with his old rig, but the upgrade options for him are really exciting and not too pricey these days.
@@HM-rz8nvif an FX can't bottleneck my Vega 64 it won't bottleneck a 5700XT / 6600XT.
A properly tuned and set up FX will be able to drive those GPUs with ease.
When I built my first pc I thought about going with the 8350 but ended up with a 4690k for $20 more, I always heard the price of the FX was much better but I never saw that. Intel chip was barely any more money and did better, seems to have aged a lot better as well
Both CPUs were among the high end of their time. Personally I've put together an FX-8350 build all these years ago with Crosshair Formula Z , 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 2400MHz and 2x480GB Corsair Force GT SSDs in RAID 0 and Corsair AIO over the CPU with the Corsair Ram Cooler over the dimms nicely sitting in a Corsair case from the era with plenty of space air flow and 6 Corsair LM120 fans to move that air around and all that powered by Corsair 750TX. The setup has changed few GPUs through the years and is now rocking an ROG GTX 1070 and the thing is still rock solid ! One thing that you forgot to mention about the FX platform is that it was super tunable and tweakable and thus why I have to disagree with the performance you've shown in this video. Even you've shown us on the channel before how to get way better performance with tweaking and optimising and you also know that the FX-8350 is capable of delivering way more than what you are showing here. Same can be said about the intel chip too ! My point is that out of the box intel performance was obviously better but with some time spent to tweak the FX , the gap can narrow a lot and even disappear in some instances however the AMD platform costed only fraction of the intel platform at the time. Both CPUs still rock solid for budget builds and it all comes down to price in my opinion
Hahaha I knew some of these comments would appear 😂😂
Cope
Nah I had a FX9590 and ngl after switching to Intel it was a night and day difference AMD FX is ass. When Ryzen came out I switched back to a Ryzen 3600 which is still playing good rn planning to get a 5600x to upgrade
Well ,excuse me Bryan but I feel that I have to defend a little the FX-8350(although I’ve always been an nVIDIA fan ,and I don’t really care about AMD or Intel ,but nevertheless … ) :
1)First of all , the FX-8350 is a “ *Vishera* ” architecture , *NOT* a “Bulldozer”
2)My brother used to love F1 2016 & F1 2017 , and back then I used a 4-core/4 thread intel i5-760. Those 2 games were stuttering badly , to the point that my brother couldn’t play competitive against other players(*and since he loved those games you can understand that we were having a serious issue there).
I decided to build him an FX-8350 system instead , and all the stuttering was gone !!
So , in my experience , the FX-8350 ,gave me a much better experience Vs the 4-core/4-thread i5 760.
And yes , obviously anyone can say that the “Vishera” processor was released more than 1 year after the i5-760 ,but the i7-4770 was also released almost a year later than the FX-8350 , so none of those CPUs are directly comparable based on their release-date.
Pretty sure that FX 8350 is Piledriver not Bulldozer architecture. Similar but different.
Great Video once again always love your content.
I think part of the differing performance here might be the 8350's Lacking instruction sets as in it doesn't support AVX2 like the 4th gen intel does, which is pretty important in modern games.
Games do not yet require the instruction set but you'll see better performance using hardware that supports it overall.
I think a comparison between the 8350 and the i7 3770 which also lacked avx2 support would make for an interesting video or even or comparison between the 3770 and the 4770 to see the difference from instruction set support as in terms of ipc difference there isn't much there from being on the same 22nm process.
Keep up the great work! You inspire me a lot and will be looking to make content in the tech space in the future. :D
Congrats on the sponsor!
cheers, your channel is huge bro lol, did you get them to offer you a sponsorship too? absolute deals they have going on, so win-win-win
@@techyescity nah, I’m still getting offers from crypto games and VPNs and stuff right now.
Great video, I used a bunch of FX chips for running Linux with a custom kernel for Folding@home, they worked absolutely great for that.
I've dealt with a few 8320/50 machines lately. One was just a drop in replacement from an fx-4300 for my dad's email/internet/spreadsheet machine. Night and day what the extra cores do. Then I keep one around as my test machine...test server stuff before I do it mainstream or a win11 unsupported install, etc. Perfect for those things.
That was fun to watch. Merry Christmas all.
After starting from AMD FX 4100 in late 2012 to a AMD FX 8300 in Feb 2020 and hating so bad went to AMD 5600x in April 2021 it great for fortnite at 1440p +165fps no problems at all for all most two years now
It is a great test coming at it from today. If you get offered an FX or a Haswell, go with the haswell!
Back in the day though, the 8350 came out before I7 3770 - and if you were on a budget a 63x0+board got you enough cores to game and could be had for half of what an i5+board cost.
A few years back, I bought two Dell SFF desktop PCs. One optiplex, one precision T1700. $50 each. I put an i5 in the Opti and a 1271v3 in the Precision. Now I sold the Optiplex for basically what I pad for it in parts as a favor WITH a low profile RX550. The Precision T1700 I kept for AGES and used an MSI 1650 low profile and it BURNED through PC titles EASILY. The 1271v3 was barely $60-70 back when a used 4770-4790 was $100-120. That system was made into a gift for a friend and is now happily running indie games and Baldur's Gate 3 with zero issues at 1080p.
I still have an FX8320 and a Radeon HD 7950 3GB Twin Frozr iii which I got for free back in 2020. Now I have an i7 8700k and a GTX 1060 6GB.
Chipsets make a difference. 990FX with the Piledriver (not Bulldozer) makes a difference.
Those are Vishera CPU's(aka Piledriver), the Bulldozer line has a 1 in the 2nd digit, ie the 8120 and 8150. I had both, and there is a significant difference, the ones you have here are the better choices.
*edit note... the Piledriver CPU's work in AM3 motherboards, but they were designed for AM3+, using the 990FXA chipset. I got mine when they were new for about $150. The biggest difference is power. The AM3 have a 400hz serial link to power, the AM3+ have a 3400hz serial link. This allows for much faster power switching and delivery.
But it also affected gameplay when using an NVidia GPU. I don't know why, but you had much better GPU performance with the AM3+
Like other people here I have both a 4770k and an 8350 in use today, but unlike them, my 8350 is an amazing system. Paired with a GTX970 I get 60fps average in Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080 Medium. The 4770k can't run the game.
2nd edit* You would actually see the power decrease on that 8350 with a 990FXA mobo, simply because it has better power delivery. I may be a weird person here, but I don't usually build my pc based around a cpu, I build for the job I need starting with the mobo.
@@WarlockOvermind Silicon degradation. An unfortunate truth for Intel is that their CPU's degrade faster than AMD's. This system use to be the primary tech computer for a theater company until the onboard sound chip failed. It now lives as an office pc, attempts to game on it, anything that actually puts a load on the cpu is met with very uneven frame pacing leading to game breaking stuttering. JaysTwoCents had a video comparing 4770's to AMD FX and saw the same problem.
This problem is horribly amplified in current gen Intel cpu's.
As an owner of 4770/90 as well as 8350 & 9370, I can tell you that the 4770/4790 walks ALL OVER the bulldozer chips, no matter the rest of the setup. I still use my 4790K almost daily. 😅
I'm using Dell Optiplex 9020 with the i7 4790K. The computer is 10 years old and still kicking. Using a GPU GTX 1660 super with 500w power supply, 16GB ram ddr3, 1TB SSD, and Also using Windows 10 pro 😅
@@addyyang5691 😂 Yep exactly! That 4790K is an absolute animal. I had that thing on liquid rock solid stable @4.8Ghz as my main rig for like 6-7 years. I finally upgraded it to play Black Desert Online better about 4 years back. I now have it on air at 4.4Ghz. never a single hiccup. 1660 with mine as well 😆.
I agree, me buying a bulldozer series in the past was a huge mistake.
agree totally, i used the 4790 up until last year. its so easy to make a budget build with a 4c 8t haswell.
On a 4790K and it brutalizes the FX 8000 series (forget the model) computer. I think even the high end 2600 series put up a fight. Intel had some good times laying out incremental updates until AMD curbstomped the scene with Ryzen.
Happy holidays to you Bryan.
From the title I expect the FX to be not that good by the Intel 4th gen. I got to PCs around that time and from what I remember from the time and the years since FX hasn't aged well especially compared to the Intel 4th gen Core series. FX had more "cores" but far weaker ones. Good thing they turned around with Ryzen.
Imma see if I was right by the end of the video.
Yep was right and that power consumption by the FX system is just bad considering it was performing a lot less. The mention of the Xeon E3 1230 V3 instead of the i7 4770 made me chuckle a bit since I done the same thing since the i7 4770 was about 20 USD more than the Xeon equivalents in my area so I got myself a Xeon E3 1240 V3 and it works pretty nicely.
Comparing said Xeon and my Ryzen 5 2600 the Xeon is close to being 2/3 of the performance which is interesting but at the same time kinda expected since Ryzen 1000 and 2000 weren't as performant as later generations.
Back in 2013, my first gen i3 550 was a bit too slow and i wanted to finally upgrade my GT 220 to a proper GPU, the GTX 660. Money was tight and my older brother was an AMD CPUs fanboy(he still is), so he made me jump platforms from Intel and get the FX 6300.
That was the worst decision i ever made when it comes to PCs and in 2015 i went back to Intel, with an i5 4690k. I couldn't believe how much better and smoother the experience was. I'm glad Ryzen was such an amazing turnaround for AMD, im very pleased so far with the 3600 and recently the 5700x
At one time, had a desktop with an 8350FX with a GTX970 and a notebook with an i7 4210HQ with a GTX860M. Those two systems were extremely close in performance. Either one could handle the games I was playing or rip to FLAC or whatever else. It wasn't my intent to do that but it happened. I still have the i7 notebook running strong but it is absolutely stomped flat by the Ryzen 5800X/6700XT desktop I have now.
my first serious gaming PC had an 8350 in it, along with 770 4gb cards in SLI. That didn't last long. I went 4790k and used that system until 2018, when I put a 1070 in it and used it for another year. 4th gen i7s really held up.
I built my first ground-up PC around the FX-8350 and an R9-270X graphics card. Later I bought an R9-290, then a pair of them in Crossfire, trying to get more performance from a CPU that was OC'd to 4.8 Ghz but still struggling. That final version was named _Spaceheater,_, and it deserved the moniker. My eventual upgrade from the FX-8350 machine was to a Core i7 6850K, a 6-core, 12-thread, quad-channel, HEDT beast, with a 980Ti, then a pair of them, on a custom liquid loop. Sort of a reward for having tolerated my earlier error for a couple of years.
i had an 8350 back in 2012, and it never had a stutter issue back then, like at all, ever. Something seems off, maybe the board, maybe the chip.
Nothing in 2012 was as intense as the games shown. I also owned one, it got stomped by Intel CPU’s back then too. They were useable though.
well i use for long time fx cpus . no stuttering in desktop and smooth gameplay with an r9 280 and 1080p . so i can 't confirm your testing in this way
For best performance with the FX chips lol you should really replace thermal pads on the motherboard under all the heat sinks and replacement paste it helps a lot when your VRAM is not overheating on the motherboard or the north bridge and Southbridge are not overheating it can make a difference to performance when the motherboard is not overheating.
I think the big nail in the coffin for the amd fx cpu was it's instruction sets. The Haswell is still VERY modern since it was the first avx2 cpu series. Back in the day that didn't seem like such a big deal but now it's kind of commonly expected that a cpu will have avx2 so games demand it more. yeah it's performance was always behind the intel, but not 20x weaker, that's got to be from the FX's outdated instructions. It's a shame AMD deliberately chose to keep the AM3 so outdated and progress the bulldozer on other platforms to eventually excavator with avx2. I'd have loved to see an AMD 8 excavator core cpu (yes I know technically the first excavator avx2 cpus were am4).
This is an aplles to oranges comparison. When I built a system at that time I could get either current gen i3(2c/4thr)/previous gen lower i5(4c/4thr or smth) or FX6300(6cores) for almost the same price. The FX6300 lasted for 5 years in my system and I haven't had any complaints or regrets on my desicion. all current gen i5/i7 were more than double the price. so, for a correct comparison, you should benchmark 2 cpu's with the same MSRP
Maybe something with your configuration . Tried fx8320 last year and for me desktop usage with Samsung 850 Evo and mismatch 20gb of 1333mhz ddr3 was perfectly fine ... What was not fine was heat generation and PCI 2.0 bootleneck . Tried on windows 11
Didn't the i7-4770 get released about 2 years later than the FX-8350?
Wouldn't the i7-2600 be a better comparison?
From memory that would drop it pretty close the the FX chip.
I was thinking you were just comparing price for price, but then you mentioned The 4770 cost $50 and the 8350 you pay max $15.
Let's be honest though, if you have either of these, it might be time to start saving for an upgrade.
Amd really turned the tables. I went from a 9900k to a 7800x3d. From that comparison youd think intel was the one making the power robbing heat sources the whole time
I got an 8350 for $60 in like 2013 or 2015 and then got a $100 class action settlement for it. So it cost me -$40. Best price to performance ratio ever! It replaced the FX4100 that I got for $10 on an amazon pricing error.
Your board has a weak vrm power delivery system.
For 8core FX you need motherboard with 10 or more "phase" power.
You didnt check the clocks of the cpu during your tests, especially during lags. The standard behavior of a mobo, with weak cpu power delivery system that overheats, is to drop clocks of the cpu to 1600MHz and voltages to 1.000volts for some seconds in order to keep up with the heat.
I would run this test again with a better motherboard just for consistency.
Back in the days I replaced (sold) 3 motherboards for the FX to stay at 100%
1) Asrock 980DE U3S3 (4+1 phase power) it kept up for about 3 minutes full power before it started throttle. Asrock sent me 3 different bios files trying to fix the problem. Every time (file) it was worse. Finally they offered me a free replacement with the next:
2) Asrock 970 extreme 3 (also 4+1 phase power) and the throttling was much worse than the previous motherboard. Being tired of the situation they offered me the option to pay a small fee of 20euros and replace the motherboard with 990FX Extreme9 wich is a 12+2 power phase motherboard. Because I had to wait for about a month for the motherboard to be available again (It was then out of stock) i asked them to refund me the motherboard, something they did.
3) Gigabyte 990XA-UD3 Rev 3.0 with is a 8+2 phase power motherboard. The board again throttled less than the Asrock 980DE U3/S3 but it again throttled. I had to try to make it throttle with prime 95 (maximum heat option) but again throttled. I kept it for 2-3 years like that for productivity tasks. I then sold it. When removed it I noticed darkening and bulging of the pcb under vrms close to the northbridge. The motherboard is bought by my pc technician who is still using it with an Fx8350 as his main workshop pc.
4) MSI 970 Gaming : The final! With 6+2 power phases and the heatsink over vrm attached tightly with metal screws over a backplate it finaly managed to pass the prime95 test with a top down cooler. I forgot to mention that all of the above mobos was only usable when the fan from the cpu cooler blow air on top of the vrm heatsink. So i used only the stock cooler. But no overclocking past stock voltage was possible because of throttling. So i kept it stock clocks and voltages until today that I casually use it for backup tasks (raid 10).
It took me 4 motherboards and a lot of experimentation to make the FX8350 perform as it should.
I would like to see you try with a better motherboard.
Great vid as always! I'd like to see note on what adapters you use on that 970
I Bulldozer was price competitive to the i5 line, like the great i5-2500K. Both oc well, easily get i5-2500k@4.2GHz and fx-8350@4.6GHz (I could do 4.8GHz too.)
The fight of 4-BigCores vs 8-littleCores was the contest.
Please try the i7 without HyperThreading to see the contest it was to be "better" than.
(Note: the 4770 was worth over double the 8350.)
started watching this month and love all the vids keep it up and i cant wait for episode 4
I am curious to see comparison between phenom x6 and FX processor. Please ,make such video !
Merry Christmas mate! Thanks for the awesome content.
The FX-8350 was not marketed or sold against the i7. It was pitted against the i5 in the same price bracket, and is 12 years old at this point. And while not obvious years ago, it was more future proof than the 4c/4t i5 processors, let alone the i3 and Pentium. It became more evident with DX 12 titles that have rendering issues on 4c/4t processors, and anything that actually did lean on more than 4c/4t, especially concerning frame times. Performance on games optimized for single core/thread performance still ran more than fine on FX. The older 4th gen and prior i7 4c/8t processors themselves were very future proof, but also much more expensive. The launch price of the 3770 was $80 more than the FX-8350, and the 4770 was $110 more here in the US. So basically not even remotely in the same price/performance bracket, so it ends up being an apples to oranges comparison. It's going to be moot eventually though as more games get released that use AVX2 instead of AVX. No one at this point should be doing budget builds based on FX or 3rd gen and prior i7. 4th gen i7 should be the minimum going forward as of this year.
Haswell is quite good to this day. i7 4790 in my secondary/living room gaming PC.
Great info as always. I scored two I7-4790's for $50 US shipped and have a 3rd one in my old HPZ 230 with a GTX 1060 and it runs fine and are really good bargains. I7-4770"s can be had in old HP Elite machines out here for cheap too. Thanks for the tip on the Xeon E3 1230 v3. Happy New Year to you and yours.
My daughter is still running an old system I salvaged with a 4770 in it and an also ancient GTX 960. Nothing fancy or exciting, but the price was right. (Free/hand-me-down/old bits laying around my scrap pile.)
I had the 4670K in earlier days and daydreamed of owning an eight core. Thankfully didn't spend any money on AMD until Zen 2.
At the time yes the FX 8350 was the better deal. I Purchased an FX 8350 for about $100 new back in 2014/15 and current i7s were going for about twice that price. I used that platform until about 2018 with a GTX 780ti and AC Origins was still running on that platform. I didn't run across any game that wouldn't play at reasonable settings on that platform before I sold it. If you get 4 or 5 years out of a platform for half the price of the alternative, you're winning. If I had gone Intel I would have had to upgrade my entire platform the same way I did the AMD after 4 years, so it was a wash in the end and I got to enjoy some great games.
Plus, current Windows 10 doesn't play well with older AMD. With all of the updates, this isn't the same Windows 10 that we ran when this platform was fresh.
people use to go with the FX 8350 or 8320 (my case) bc the I7-4770 was more expensive at the time. gr8t vid tho.
but try over clocking and see what happens, the fx can oc to 4.65 no problem.
Seiing this and then knowing how my 5800X3D performs, it's almost astonishing how far AMD has come in 10 years. Yes that's a long time, like basically middle schooler me vs uni graduate me today, but in chip timescales it's actually not a lot.
Its also incredible how little Intel has innovated in those 10 years besides mostly just adding more cores and raising the clocks.
I still have my FX 8350. In fact, I still run it on a Asrock 970 M Pro 3 mother board with a NVMe SSD in the PCIe slot with a RX 580 GB. I have windows 10 booting from the PCIe nvme SSD, it's a 1tb Samsung Gen 3 970 Evo plus with 32 GB of 1866 MHZ RAM occupying all 4 slots.
I'm going to install Linux on it and keep it running for another 3 years just because I can. Long live pile driver!
To me 2nd and 4th gen Intel processors were some of the best they ever made. I still have a mini pc with a 4th gen that i keep as a spare in case something wrong happens to my main PCs. 4th gen is still perfectly usable to this day. Back then i had an FX 6300 and while it was decent,an i5 4570 still felt way better even in basic tasks
i used a 4790 all the way up until last year lol. the value i got out of that cpu was crazy... every year it just kept giving and giving. haswell was one of my favourite lines ever and favourite go to for refurb/budget builds.
Honestly if fx didn't share was it fp ? It would have been pretty fast so you can get idea by adding 50% to ur fx scores
Yes bulldozer was worse than the equivalent Intel cpu, but you fail to tell your audience that the actual competitor is the Intel i7-3770. It’s kind of unfair to compare bulldozer to a generation newer Intel cpu. The results would be much closer compared to the 3770
The FX8350 is still great and can compete (in games) with the 4770. But the real "magic" is when you put all the thermal headroom into overclocking Hypertransfer, Northbridge and RAM. This is something the i7 4770 and a B or H series board can't do. Almost all 1600C9 sticks will do 2133C11 and almost all the CPUs will do 2600 NB. This improves performance in games significantly.
Unfortuantely, most people just overclock the core, which does almost nothing. You can and should still do 4.4 or 4.5 all core at 1.45V or so, but save the thermal headroom for where it matters.
Your speaking facts north bridge, ram and hyper transfer definitely do the most I had a golden chip back in the day that could hit 5ghz all core at 1.45 and it performed much better at 4.7ghz mostly bus oced with the northbridge pushed to 2831mhz and ddr3 2466mhz with lowered timings then pushing the hyper transfer 100mhz over stock on sabertooth board for 5400MT/s more than ramping up core clocks helping alleviate the module bottleneck works much better
My first pc in 2016 was a FX 6300. It ran very hot but it introduced me into the pc gaming world so it will always have a place in my heart. Now I have a 5800x3d and love it! I will stick with AMD in the future if they keep doing what they are doing!
Anyway, I never understood this: at the end of the day, did the 8350 really have 8 cores or not?
got a question for you, Mr. Yes. You mentioned an OEM lenovo board that you adapted but how did you stop the OEM errors? I have a Dell optiplex 7020 MT that keeps spitting out rear fan failure warnings because there is none. Is there any solution? Thank you and Happy Holidays to you!
Nice video, but I have fun with my fx 8320, cause all stotter was deletet with changing to nvme ssd, cause the boards on board components were garbage without tweaking, especially the ssd controller. that caused stuttering. I got rid of it. I am lucky that my board has pcie 3, so it still holds its ground in most games. But bulldozer does not have more cores. It has 4 fpus not 8, so how should it improve?😂
The amd fx-4350 in my main has still not kicked the dust yet. Still waiting before I upgrade😢
Funny, I got a Gigabyte Z87-D3HP for $28 shipped from an estate sale. I then bought a $39 i7 4770k from UCW through Jawa. It boots but I have it back in the box until I am ready to deal with it. $67 netted me the 3rd to last chip & board i'd recommend for entry level. It goes i7 4770, i7 4790, i7 4770k, i7 4790k. I'd include the i7 5775c but as you know it's cost prohibitive.
Edit: I do give out i5 Haswells to children looking to play Minecraft and Roblox as they work fine with those games. I do not sell them though, Anything i5 haswell and under goes out free. that includes Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge and Nehalem. Unless laptop. That goes by a case to case basis. You know, whether it has a dGPU or not.
Tech Yes City my maan used to watch you back in the day, when you were just starting out and actually changed your name but reversed it back :D, I dont know if its me but youve goten a bit older :D keep these amazing videos up nontheless ^)^
Some 4060s come with an x8 interface. If you put that in the PCIe 2.0 socket of the FX it would be near useless. Very slow. Whatever you put in there needs the full x16 interface. I do not know which one you used so I can't tell if it's more than just the chip sucking.
Morale of the story:
Never ever buy yourself any Graphics Card less than PCIe x16. Regardless of Generation or its age.
@@niezzayt3809 Not exactly the moral of the story. If one does one's research, one can bypass some of the headaches that come with PC building. You do not need a full x16 if you have a PCIe gen 4 connector. But once you start lowering the bandwidth by lowering the connector to PCIe 3 or 2? You are throttling the card. It becomes bandwidth starved and your 1% and .1% lows take a HUGE dip. With these older boards you want to max out with RTX 2xxx series. In this case I would say a 2070 or 2080. 2080 Ti would be overkill but just like my GTX 1080 and these other cards I have suggested, it'll allow you to play older games in 4K pushing the majority of the heavy lifting onto the GPU.
Edit: Almost forgot the Vega cards. They would be good here too but with driver support waning I am not sure if you should go that way.
What about with Water Cooling would the FX-8350 perform better
makes more sense to compare the 3770 than the 4770 since they are from roughly the same time.
Memory also makes a huge difference on both chips to be honest. 8350 also have a lot of room to undervolt, overclock or both.
Usually a solid -0.50mv and 200-400mhz for free on each one. The stock 4.0 Ghz could be ran a solid -0.75mv on the worst of the worst samples.
They were heavily overvolted, getting more out of it takes about the same effort as XMP.
I don't have the exact same i7, I have two of the i7-4710HQ in laptops from about 2014. I stopped using them back in 2019-2020, but not because the CPU performance was too bad.
Ok, Brian the cpu had issues with scheduler if you remember there is a tool for turning off core parking on AMD 8000 series. Also I had better results with Lows and also OC using a 1.3v underclock on the cores. Remember win10 and win 11 had alot of introductions to parking and scheduling for cpus that continued a certain design which AMD and Intel both dont use, Intel not at all and AMD not since zen came out..... Note on the core parking issue windows 7, 8, and 8.1 release a KB update to address that performance issue. Its most likely not in win10 or newer. I use both intel and AMD so im not a AMD shill but know that the OS during that cpu operations had modifications. Also a chipset update for it was released as well around that time. The AMD cpu 8000 and 9000 series sadly was a good thought on paper but needed software to match the architecture which AMD didnt have market share so why should they. If they did im sure it would of been different in even more higher performance and to be honest might of been the fabric of the design for ryzen because it was a shared cache and Int cores tied to a main core so who knows.
Funny how I have these two systems at my workplace and they are still working. Except the lenovo h81 mobo just straight up died
The FX series was really AMDs "Core Ultra" moment.
No I didn't.. 😂
way worse
@@saricubra2867 Intel jumped from 10nm to 4nm and their 6+8+2 core Meteor Lake performs worse than a 6+8 core Raptor Lake chip on the same wattage while being more expensive to make, it's a disaster for them.
@@lharsay But remember that Bulldozer had 40% worse IPC than Sandy Bridge.
@@lharsay Pentium D was the Bulldozer moment, intel then launched Core 2 Duo that has twice the IPC or something like that
Someone brought me a PC to fix with an 8350 in it that was having problems. I got everything sorted, but I was curious how well it performed, and the 8350 was more than a slight bottleneck to the even the 1650 they had installed. And that system even had a nice Asus 990FX mobo.
The fx result on fortnite is so odd. Maybe it has something to do with the new season or dx12, because when I tested the fx 6300 with a gtx 750 ti, it got 60fps using dx11
Used to own an AMD 8350, my first OC. It was a heat monster! haha! But it was fun! Would be nice to see how it behaves in productivity benchmarks, DaVinci Resolve especially since I'm working with it on my current Ryzen 5900X build. Would be nice to see the difference.
Dont know who the hell compared the FX series to 4th gen intel. Most of the guys I know compare FX to 2nd or 3rd gen intel
The FX-8350 came out in October 2012, with speed bump variants coming out throughout 2013 (FX-9370 in June 2013) and even as late as 2014 (FX-8370 came out in September 2014). The i7 4770K came out in June 2013. These chips very much existed in about the same time period as each other.
@@cardboardsnail The 8300 series aka the pile driver was released at the same time as the 3rd gen. It was the fx 9000 series that was released a year later which are just an overclocked version of the piledriver without really tweak or architectural improvements.
I have three systems using the i7 4770K, 4790, and 7700k paired with RTX 3060Ti's.
They are awesome chips that still do massive work. Great for emulators, couch gaming, moderate gaming.
Just to add something please be aware that the 970 boards had issues with the 8350s and all similar CPUs, vrm gets to hot and it causes issues , can you try just the worst case on the low FPS with a fan on the vrm?. I had a 8150 ages ago at 5ghz and a 990 formula z board. Also they can run fast ram easy.
It's funny. I actually watched your videos back in 2012 and it was why I bought an 8350 :P It was like a $500 gaming pc build video or something lol. I don't think you're innocent on the 8350 either.
Need a board with 225 watt rated socket and ddr3 2400 ram for the amd
I had an 8120 and I upgraded it for a 4790K . Upgraded that to a 9700K Upgraded that to a 7800x3d . My little brother still uses the 4790K in a workstation he uses for a DAW !
Really bad idea pairing fx with a nvidia card, driver overhead here the main issue ,next time u should try on both an amd card for surely closing the gap between the two
You just tested my historical upgrade path. I didn't upgrade again until Ryzen 2000 series.
It's more the architecture than the cores that's being compared here. The FX 8350 used a terrible architecture that shared critical resources across each 'module' which AMD considered 2 cores while in reality each module was closer to a single core with dual threads. I look at the FX series CPU's as quad cores with hyperthreading, not a true 8 core. If you really want to do a core count comparison, I'd use the newer Ryzen series to do it. Or you could compare older Intel quads like the 4770 to newer CPUs like the 8700k or 9900k to see how more cores affects the results. That would be a better core count comparison.
I still use the FX-8350 for GTA V RP, and Racing Sim, it doesn't disappoint me. Paired with RX570 8gb, and 24gn of RAM. The only negative thing is that the PC only has HDD, but it's not very slow.
omg, that Joe - Stutters joke was incredible, i used to love that song!
I've got a ud7-990fxa v1.1 from gigabyte, a fx6100 and a fx9370, and I can run vfio-pci passthrough with my hd6770, gt1030, and rx580 while running a 16x pcie card with 6 controllers and a mux on it connected to zfs arrays of ssds, and still have room for two more addin cards (I was testing some optane nvme cards last year)
They werent the best chips ever made, but the platform was phenomenal for the time and it was SO much cheaper than trying to get Intel+iommu and more than 4 cores
My workstation is still running today. It gets tricked into booting in uefi mode, launches zfsbootmenu, decrypts my root zfs arrays, and boots (currently) into a custom Ubuntu Noble 24.04 install