Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 17 to 32 of 44

Thread: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

  1. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    527
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    55 times in 31 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    It's better, and priced right for the performance. I really hope for AMD's sake that GlobalFoundries' 32nm is a brilliant yielder, even for large dies like this, otherwise AMD will keep on bleeding money. It's very hard to compete with a competitor a full node ahead of you in process unless your yields are nothing short of awesome. And even then, as this review highlights, you don't have the power consumption improvements.

    AMD really need to put their foot down on Steamroller and the FX8550, and get it out as soon as GlobalFoundries' 28nm process is yielding okay - none of this delaying release and falling even further behind rubbish.

  2. #18
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    29
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    hmmm interesting results. Though as a budget builder I will be looking more at the i3 range versus vishera fx 4300 and 6300 that will be interesting considering price/performance but will have to wait a bit more for info. Glad to see they are going to price them rather aggressively.

  3. #19
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by sassyjay View Post
    hmmm interesting results. Though as a budget builder I will be looking more at the i3 range versus vishera fx 4300 and 6300 that will be interesting considering price/performance but will have to wait a bit more for info. Glad to see they are going to price them rather aggressively.
    As a budget builder, i would be looking towards Trinity.

  4. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    464
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    30 times in 23 posts
    • Bagpuss's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9-9900K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro DDR4 3400
      • Storage:
      • Gigabyte 512GB NVMe SSD, Crucial 1Tb NVMe SSD, 6Tb Seagate 7200
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 2080 Black Edition
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 850 RMx 850 Gold
      • Case:
      • Fractal Meshify C Copper Front Panel
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG UK850 27in 4K HDR Freesync/Gsync
      • Internet:
      • Three Mobile 4G Unlimited Data (35-45Mbit)

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Truly awful stuff...only now are these CPU's matching the old Phenom II at a clock for clock frequency.

    How is this progress?

  5. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Truly awful stuff...only now are these CPU's matching the old Phenom II at a clock for clock frequency.

    How is this progress?
    Because it's a different architecture? The old Phenom II's couldn't even overclock to 4 GHz with 4 cores (My 940 BE reached 3.9 and that was a good chip), let alone come out at stock 4 GHz with 8 cores.

  6. #22
    Oh Crumbs.... Biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N. Yorkshire
    Posts
    11,193
    Thanks
    1,394
    Thanked
    1,091 times in 833 posts
    • Biscuit's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI B450M Mortar
      • CPU:
      • AMD 2700X (Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3)
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Patriot Viper 2 @ 3466MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB WD Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290X Vapor-X
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic Focus Gold 750W
      • Case:
      • Lian Li PC-V359
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 80/20

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo75 View Post
    Because it's a different architecture? The old Phenom II's couldn't even overclock to 4 GHz with 4 cores (My 940 BE reached 3.9 and that was a good chip), let alone come out at stock 4 GHz with 8 cores.
    My 955 is running above 4GHz completely stable

    I have had it much higher than this aswell but i fell back to this due to the increased voltage required to hit the higher temps.

  7. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Yes the C3 chips could hit 4.2-4.3 with good air, but the C2's couldn't get to 4 GHz even.

  8. #24
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    91
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    5 times in 1 post

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Would the AMD FX 8350 be better then a Core i5 for running a VM host with multiple Virtual Machines?

  9. #25
    Seriously casual gamer KeyboardDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,013
    Thanks
    774
    Thanked
    280 times in 242 posts
    • KeyboardDemon's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Sabretooth Z77
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k + Corsair H80 (Refurbed)
      • Memory:
      • 16gb (4x4gb) Corsair Vengence Red (1866mhz) - (Because it looks good in a black mobo)
      • Storage:
      • Crucial M550 SSD 1TB + 2x 500GB Seagate HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980 SC ACX 2.0 (Warranty replacement for 780Ti SC ACX)
      • PSU:
      • EVGA 750 watt SuperNova G2
      • Case:
      • Silverstone RV03
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus Swift PG278Q
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity (40mbs dl/10mbs ul)

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Truly awful stuff...only now are these CPU's matching the old Phenom II at a clock for clock frequency.

    How is this progress?
    Is that really the case? I've just seen this video which is suggesting that the FX8350 gains 10-15% over the FX8150.

    I think the FX8350 would make more than an adequate replacement for my Phenom II X4 965 in my Crosshair V mobo.

  10. #26
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by Denis_iii View Post
    Would the AMD FX 8350 be better then a Core i5 for running a VM host with multiple Virtual Machines?
    I would say even an FX8320 is worth a look TBH. The K series CPUs from Intel also lack IOMMU too,although you need motherboard support too and AFAIK,some of the cheaper AMD motherboards have it unlike the equivalent Intel motherboards(I could be wrong).

  11. #27
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Gateshead
    Posts
    15,196
    Thanks
    1,231
    Thanked
    2,291 times in 1,874 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4GB DDR4 2666
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by KeyboardDemon View Post
    I think the FX8350 would make more than an adequate replacement for my Phenom II X4 965 in my Crosshair V mobo.
    Check the anandtech bench. Obviously it's not entirely comprehensive, but for the benchmarks chosen the FX8350 absolutely slaughters the 965BE. Up to twice the performance in some benchmarks - smallest improvement appears to be ~10% in Cinebench R10 single threaded.

    tbh the 6300 is no worse than equal to it in every test, and miles ahead in some. Only the FX4300 is behind the 965BE in any test - they're fairly evenly matched really (although if you do anything that can take advantage of AES, AVX or any of the other new instructions in Vishera, the FX will obviously slaughter the 965BE).

    Oh, and incidentally, every FX CPU beats out the 965BE in Cinebench R10 single thread. It would appear that "poor" single-threaded performance is relative...

  12. Received thanks from:

    KeyboardDemon (23-10-2012)

  13. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    343
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked
    9 times in 7 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Not enough to make me go AMD just yet, the price is tempting for sure, but it's the Single core performance in the Cinebench scores I've seen (~40% slower than 3770k) that directly effect me, so I can't have it in a farm over a 3570k, it'd become a bottleneck.

    On this current trajectory, will AMD ever catch Intel in performance terms?

  14. #29
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by brasco View Post
    Not enough to make me go AMD just yet, the price is tempting for sure, but it's the Single core performance in the Cinebench scores I've seen (~40% slower than 3770k) that directly effect me, so I can't have it in a farm over a 3570k, it'd become a bottleneck.

    On this current trajectory, will AMD ever catch Intel in performance terms?
    Cinebench is multi-threaded. CB 11.5 is not even that relevant now for Maxon software as the latest versions are R13 and r14 for Cinema 4D,and 11.5 is based on a much older version. An older engine will lack optimisations for newer CPUs as you know.



    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/fx-835...w-32550-9.html



    http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/fx-835...w-32550-9.html





    http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-...ray-v-ray.html



    http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...rrives-12.html



    http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...#content_start
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 23-10-2012 at 04:16 PM.

  15. #30
    Senior Member Brewster0101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,614
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked
    54 times in 44 posts
    • Brewster0101's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus m5a99x evo
      • CPU:
      • AMD FX 8350
      • Memory:
      • 8GB (2x4) Corsair Vengence DDR3 1600mghz
      • Storage:
      • Western Green 3TB + Samsung 850Evo 512MB SSD, + 2TB NAS
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI 280X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AXi760
      • Case:
      • Corsair 650D
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 27" 27EA63 IPS LED
      • Internet:
      • 120Mb Bt

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Looks like a reasonable chip to me. TDP is a little disappointing but @ £150 I tihnk this is a good value chip. It is about £30 cheaper than the intel 3570 and also the motherboards are cheaper. Not a bad set up....

    I wonder what the specs will be of a Trinity CPU at £120? Maybe this will be the show stopper....

  16. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    343
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked
    9 times in 7 posts

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    Cinebench is multi-threaded. CB 11.5 is not even that relevant now for Maxon software as the latest versions are R13 and r14 for Cinema 4D,and 11.5 is based on a much older version. An older engine will lack optimisations for newer CPUs as you know.
    Hi Cat, you've misread and you're wrong on a couple of things, I use Cinema 4D everyday and as I mentioned it's the Single-threaded performance that's a big let down. Cinebench tests both Single and Multithreading, Cinema's render engine and the third party engines Vray etc all use multithreading well, but they are still held up by single threaded tasks that have to process before the render can proceed. The core program is massively dependent on single core performance, OpenGL for example needs the CPU to feed the textures in, that's why Cinebench's GPU tests are mostly moot unless testing with the same CPU.

    This is why my 4.9 2600K still outpaces my 4.3 3930 in everyday tasks.

    Also, although Cinebench 11.5 is old they still use the same core coding for the AR3 engine in R12 and up.

    To reiterate, the 8350's single core performance is so low (~40% less than the 3770k) that it would bottleneck a renderfarm.

  17. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (23-10-2012)

  18. #32
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Reviews - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver CPU

    Quote Originally Posted by brasco View Post
    Hi Cat, you've misread and you're wrong on a couple of things, I use Cinema 4D everyday and as I mentioned it's the Single-threaded performance that's a big let down. Cinebench tests both Single and Multithreading, Cinema's render engine and the third party engines Vray etc all use multithreading well, but they are still held up by single threaded tasks that have to process before the render can proceed. The core program is massively dependent on single core performance, OpenGL for example needs the CPU to feed the textures in, that's why Cinebench's GPU tests are mostly moot unless testing with the same CPU.

    This is why my 4.9 2600K still outpaces my 4.3 3930 in everyday tasks.

    Also, although Cinebench 11.5 is old they still use the same core coding for the AR3 engine in R12 and up.

    To reiterate, the 8350's single core performance is so low (~40% less than the 3770k) that it would bottleneck a renderfarm.
    So you are saying less time is spent on the rendering than other tasks?? I know some other people who have done rendering stuff,and it is seemed he actual rendering step took the longest although it was not 3ds Max they used. I thought it was the modelling steps which were lightly threaded. Meh,the things you learn!!

    Looking at what other people have said about later versions of the Cinema 4D engines,the newer version do have better performance on AMD CPUs relative to Intel CPUs than with 11.5,although maybe they are mistaken. You definitely see this with R10 as the relative scores are slightly different in single threaded and multithreaded tests. Its also very strange that loads of reviews around the internet don't mention this,what you mention about single thread bottlenecks. Its not mentioned in any of them and you would think with the amount spent on a 3ds MAX or POV Ray license,they would probably mention this?? They would be distorting the realworld figures then as any reviewers would be seeing these effects when running the benchmarks??

    So an overclocked Core i5 3570K would be faster overall for a rendering task than a FX8350 or a Core i7 3930K at stock?? It has better single thread performance than both even at stock.

    It might be worth you commenting this on other review websites,so they give a more accurate realworld view of the workload.

    So,if your Core i7 3930K is slower overall,why do you still have it then?? Would it make more sense to ditch it?? Get a Core i7 2600K or Core i7 3770K?? Or are you dropping in an IB-E as that should have better IPC?? Wouldn't Haswell be better then??
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 23-10-2012 at 06:22 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •