Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!


Discussion on Article:
AMD FX-8350, FX-8320, FX-6300 and FX-4300: All Vishera Processors in One Review!

Started by: GaMEChld | Date 12/04/12 02:11:39 PM
Comments: 218 | Last Comment:  09/25/16 04:37:36 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


"Therefore, Socket AM3+ platform probably won’t be a good choice for everyday use..."

Really? Damn it, who could have thought facebooking requires a Core i7...
11 1 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 12/04/12 02:45:40 PM]
- collapse thread

I second that. Should have read:

"Therefore, the socket AM3+ system is a great choice for all but the most demanding workloads. Budget conscience consumers who value long-term platform stability will be particularly interested in their upgrade options."


"Smart system builders will realize that the CPU is no longer the biggest bottleneck and will shift the saved money to SSD, GPU or additional RAM in order to build a well balanced and screaming workstation."
10 1 [Posted by: Pedro_mann  | Date: 12/04/12 07:36:40 PM]
I agree, balance is the key! Gaming with an I7 XXXX and a GT620 graphic card won't get you much fun.
8 1 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/05/12 12:32:26 PM]
epic thread
1 0 [Posted by: Yorgos  | Date: 12/16/12 06:35:26 AM]

The games tests are a little strange.To come to the conclusion that FX is not good for gaming you really need to test some games ,that are usually played by most of the people out there not some nieche ones.
Maybe you should take a look at video card testing at techpowerup.

Games like BF 3 ,BF BC2 ,CS GO ,Max Payne 3 , MOH Warfighter ,latest COD ,COH , games played by thousands of people should be present.This are made for multicore CPU-s.
Testing with games like Batman or Borderlands in there is pathetic sorry.

And today we already have 2 more nice games ,Far Cry 3 and Hitman .

Maybe you can make a special review for FX in games only ,tests made running at 1920 X 1080 resolutions minimum.Testing SLI and X-Fire is also welcomed for bottleneck show off (Intel fan-boys fill forums with the FX weaknesses in multi card configs).

Put some imagination in this tests ,consider yourself a customer and not a reviewer in the first place ,see if this CPU-s worth the money.
10 2 [Posted by: HeadlessBottleneck  | Date: 12/04/12 02:49:41 PM]
- collapse thread

What's even more important is that every solutions offered playable framerates (with the exception of Metro 2033). A 10fps is not that of a big deal in my life. I'm not making a living out of the heads I virtualy blow up in Borderlands.
5 1 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/05/12 12:40:33 PM]
PLease spare Borderlands 2!!! It's the only game that went as far as to make a mission where a bandit would just yell at me: "Shoot me in the face" jumping around until... I shot him the face! He even thank me for doing it. Brings a tear to the eye!
3 1 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/10/12 01:17:33 PM]
i5 3570K is beaten by 8350 in BF3 .. when done with fraps play though.. also, FX arebetter at the new methodology methor.. the frame latency.. i3 is very badin frame latrency..when you have over 40 fps.. it won't matter.. but if you have a bad frame latency.. even at 40 fps.. the gameplay might get choppy at times.. fx 8350 IS a direct competitor against 3570K .. look at Linus or Teksyndicate.. they have found out the Vishera isn;t that bad actually..
0 0 [Posted by: anasbinqamar  | Date: 04/07/13 03:56:51 AM]

What most PC hardware reviewers still fail to comprehend is that the majority of consumers do not buy the top of the line CPU or GPU. Most consumers buy the best bang for the buck products and let the suckers over-pay for bragging rights. AMD is thus not losing a lot of sales by not having the over-hyped, over-priced CPU of the week.

What the Vishera FX models do is provide the best bang for the buck for most consumers. Intel will continue to dominate as long as they have the inside line with PC makers and can spend a lot of marketing dollars to buy sales.

The good news for consumers is all AMD needs to do is keep delivering good products like Trinity APUs for laptops and desktop use, Vishera for discrete CPU use in desktops and Opterons for servers. The new Opteron 4300 and 3300 Piledriver based CPUs are an excellent product and value. AMD most definitely is offering a very good performance vs. cost proposition and Vishera sales reflect this.

As one reviewer on Newegg admitted... He listened to the Intel fanbois and went out and bought an i7. After the excellent Vishera reviews he decided to try one. He says FX-8350 blows his i7 out of the water and that the i7 system was a $1200 mistake. Seeing with your own eyes is believing. All you need to do is run real applications, not tainted benches to see with you own eyes how well AMD's APUs and CPUs perform real world.

Then you can make an informed decision as to what best meets your needs without the fanbois hype. Dollar for dollar most people will find that AMD delivers the best user experience and that's all that really counts unless you're a fanbois.
7 5 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 12/04/12 03:32:15 PM]
- collapse thread

On New Egg today an i5 3470 is $20.00 more than an AMD FX-8320. As the review stated, and most reputable reviewers echo, the INTEL based CPUs provider superior "universal" performance. I'd say that's a little less than a "$1200 mistake". Your personal conclusions can be whatever you want but you don't know what others value. Just because you've summarily convinced yourself AMD is a better choice it doesn't speak for everyone else's needs or priorities.
6 0 [Posted by: chaserx  | Date: 12/04/12 04:39:01 PM]
As an enthusiast computer builder, I have to say that in real life you really do feel a difference using an AMD chip. It often looks like you get that little edge in overall responsiveness from the system. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan blindly defending a company over another. My computer is built using an Intel I7 2600K and I really appreciate it's performance. But My wife's rig is an AMD Phenom II 965 built with the same hardware and video editing or gaming on both machines feels very similar plus encoding times are almost equal. I've built many machines using both Intel and AMD chips and in the end, real life experience is too similar between both makers to sh1t on AMD. When you don't have extreme needs and if you're on a tight budget it's an excellent option.
5 1 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/05/12 01:06:06 PM]

show the post
0 3 [Posted by: KonradK  | Date: 12/04/12 04:28:24 PM]

It's nice to see the generational leap. I think AMD is setup to lead once again, once this platform matures. The problem is, will they have the will and the resources to pull it off?

Sad day if that does not happen. Just look at the stalling in the hard drive market due to lack of competition. Love them or hate them - We NEED AMD to be competitive.
2 0 [Posted by: Pedro_mann  | Date: 12/04/12 07:27:42 PM]
- collapse thread

show the post
0 5 [Posted by: KonradK  | Date: 12/05/12 05:57:53 AM]
If amd dies, you can bet on Cpu and Gpu prices doubling.
1 0 [Posted by: InsertNameHere  | Date: 12/23/12 06:57:22 PM]

hmmmm.. no benchmarks with overclocking?
I'd like to see that.
5 2 [Posted by: campdude  | Date: 12/04/12 10:56:28 PM]
- collapse thread

Very good point!
5 1 [Posted by: MHudon  | Date: 12/05/12 12:41:53 PM]

I'm surprised how little extra performance these CPUs offer over my existing i7 860 that I bought back in 2009. I got a Core 2 Duo E6600 in early 2007, then upgraded 2.5 years later and the C2D to i7 leap was a great one. Now, 3 years after that again, I actually still see no need to upgrade at all, my 860 CPU can seemingly keep up with some of these higher end CPUs. Not that it's a bad thing, I am happy I don't have to throw more money at my rig a the moment. But IMO, general performance increase seems to have stagnated a bit.
2 0 [Posted by: Joe Public  | Date: 12/06/12 06:45:16 AM]

the thing is, for games, its not the maximum that matters

its the minimum

that is what most review sites do not show.

i went from phenom 2 965
to fx-8350

my min fps went up by 50%
my max fps not so much, actually one test was slightly slower
5 0 [Posted by: ultimaone  | Date: 12/06/12 08:24:24 PM]

show the post
2 5 [Posted by: Azazel  | Date: 12/06/12 09:35:41 PM]

show the post
0 3 [Posted by: cloudedlogic  | Date: 12/16/12 10:04:57 AM]
- collapse thread

The amd processor was introduced in 2009, whilst the intel Pentium processor was introduced in 2011.
So please note the tiny 0.6 fps lead comes from a 2 year gap.

Also note in your first link, increasing the clock of the intel core i5 2500k by 1 GHz increased average frame rate by 0.3 fps, but in the FX-4000 increasing it by 1 GHz increased the frame rate by 22.5 fps. That is a huge difference when you are on a budget and have to buy a fx-4000.
1 0 [Posted by: InsertNameHere  | Date: 12/23/12 06:55:24 PM]

In general this was a nice review, but I thought SYSmark was biased, so I mainly skipped the first few pages to look at the real world result. It would be interesting to see if changing the cpuid of the amd processors really change results.
1 0 [Posted by: InsertNameHere  | Date: 12/23/12 06:47:39 PM]

Vsyem privet!

How about something new that no other review site has in their benchmark comparisons.

Take System A: P45 Mainboard with q9650 or similar CPU then match it's speed/performance to a comparable LGA1155 CPU and RAM set up and include in the graphs for future reviews like this.

Do the same with AMD System B, again matching it to today's popular platform and it's performance and showing how the progress is taking place in comparison to new tech.

Performance is still relevant regardless of hardware life cycle, we are talking statistics which is what site like this are all about.

If I had the balls knowledge and resources to support such idea I would certainly do it just to bring some spark back to these boring articles (No offence I am generally speaking).


1 0 [Posted by: ABC XYZ  | Date: 01/13/13 03:35:14 AM]

what where you settings to get 4.6 ?
0 0 [Posted by: varenus357  | Date: 04/30/13 01:31:20 PM]

what settings did you use to reach 4.6 ?also i would like to know will it be safe for my pc. im new to overclocking so i want to make sure i do it rite
0 0 [Posted by: varenus357  | Date: 04/30/13 01:32:54 PM]


Back to the Article

Add your Comment