FX8350, to upgrade, or not to upgrade, that is the question.

jamed2017

New member
Hello folks,

First of all, merry christmas to everyone...

I really only want input from people who have experienced both chips on this... 1090ts included :cool:

My 1100t, very nice and a good little chip, but shes starting to fall behind. I dont want to be swapping my rig out for something intel because simply, i dont have the money. I know i can run the fx8350 on my mobo, the question is, should i spend some money and get one? Would it be a noticeable performance boost for day to day tasks with the occasional game and autocad rendering?
 
You signed motherboard doesn't even have a "public release" BIOS for those Vishera chips. I believe they boot allright, but no core disabling, no high DDR3 o/c, not this not that, all because Asus really don't care.

I wouldn't go for a 8350 on those IV boards :/
 
If your gonna upgrade then go Intel, if not then I would stick with what you have for a while
+1 Please don't waste your money on AMD at the moment... If you're anything like me, the disappointment of AMD's new stuff will just make you wanna go Intel even more... And it will cost you much, much more in the end.
 
I think the general consensus will be to stick with your 1100, maybe throw a waterblock or d14 on it and overclock it to around the 4.3ghz mark.
I'd have a 1090t or 1100t anyday over a piledriver/bulldozer.
 
Cheers for the advise guys.

I know about the crosshair iv support, it does seem rather stable though from my research. As for ASUS not caring, I completely agree with that. I have faults with every asus product I own and I dont think i'll buy from them again.

I appreciate the advise guys, I need to sort out my cooling, I just dont want to invest heavily into this rig if i'm not going to see a decent return. Saying that I dont have the money to build anything new and for now, its still a bit of a beast, though shes getting old.

Looking at the benches the 8350 out-performs the 1100t hence my thoughts of throwing one in there.

I do worry for the future of AMD, I've only ever had one intel chip (t3200).
I guess i'm a AMD-Loyalist :nopity:
 
Asus have been perfect from my experience.

Anyway...
In day to day applications your 1100T will outperform pretty much every other AMD processor out there. No point whatsoever in upgrading to Piledriver. All new AMDs are just crap processors, with loads of cores to try and make up for it. The numbers of cores just fool stupid people into thinking they're better.

Programs and games will only use 2/3 cores (unless it's video rendering or similar) and so you're better off with higher performance per core, than just a lot of cores.

Save up more, and go for Intel when you can. No other AMD will beat your current one, unless you had ridiculous cooling and managed to overclock the hell out of a Bulldozer or Piledriver - which still won't be that much better than what you have - and it definitely won't be any where near a 3570k.
 
Or you could opt to go to the extreme and build an AMD's Bulldozer-powered Opteron 6200 system. Heck, if that cpu is good enough for the most powerful US super compter, it'd make one heck of a gaming system. :)
 
Piledriver will outperform any Phenom by a wide margin especially if you put a solid overclock on it. I went from a 4 GHz 1090 to my 4.6 GHz 8150 and its a solid upgrade and Piledriver is 15% faster than Bulldozer so it would be even better. I will likely have a 8320 before too long especially if I come out big with Newegg gift cards this Christmas. Dont believe all the AMD hate on forums. Intel is faster but AMD is plenty fast enough.

If youre building from scratch and want the absolute best then wait til March-April when Haswell comes out. If you just like AMD better or want to save a few bucks, you can certainly have a perfectly capable and high performing rig with an AMD chip.
 
Wait until you can afford the intel imo. Get a nice Ivy bridge i7 when you get the chance. I have an 1100t and it does everything I need from it. It doesn't overclock the best (3.9Gb) but it does all the stuff and performs close enough to the i7 for the price imo.
 
Piledriver are decent CPU's, I would know I have. Like you I had a Phenom II X6 1090T, with a AM3+ Motherboard. I didn't have the money to switch to intel, so I bought the 8350 a few weeks after launch. I knew when I bought it that it would never perform like a new i7 or even an i5, and it doesn't.

I would compare the performance of the 8350 to the old 2500k i5. That should give you and idea of what performance your gonna get.

If you want my opinion I would say the AMD FX 8350 is a worthy upgrade to anyone on a AM3+ Motherboard and still using the Phenom. But to anyone who has to buy a new motherboard, then Intel is the only way to go.
 
Guys Guys... the FX 8350 is similar in performance with the 3570K. In some tests a lil better in some tests a lil behind, and it is worth it. It is faster than Any Phenom II, faster than any Bulldozer. If you are going to buy it and bench it more than use it for gaming or... whatever.. then buy an Intel cause at the moment it's the best. But as far as... gaming performance for example... it does not fall far behind. On a tighter budget, I'd go for the 8350, nothing wrong with it.
 
Yeah but those are usually at 1680x1050 with low settings. HardOCP likes to benchmark Lost Planet at 800x600 for some ungodly reason. When you look at them compared realistically the differences shrink a lot. TechPowerUp did a review last year comparing a 7970 running a 8150 vs a 2500K and aside from Civilization V and Starcraft 2 there was little difference. Two guys on Overclock.net, one with a pair of 7970's running a 8320 at 4.8 and one with a 3570K at 4.8 and the differences were almost nonexistent.

Intel's speed advantage doesn't start to come into play until you're runnning very high resolutions and multiple GPU's. Kinda like a Chevy pickup with a V8 and one with a diesel. If all you do is drive around town and tow a boat or small travel trailer, you're not really gonna see the benefit of all that extra torque in the diesel. But if you're towing a 20,000 pound horse trailer than that's where that extra grunt comes in. Same in gaming. For 2560x1600 and below with a single video card, a 8320 is almost as capable as a 3570K of feeding that system to its max potential.

So if you're rolling $2000 in GPU's and monitors then you're better off with Intel. If you're on a more mainstream system, AMD is prefectly capable.
 
Last edited:
We'll AMD are releasing a FX 83xx CPU this month with the same performance as a FX 8350 but only 95 TDP because they dropped the base clock to 3.3ghz AMD will turn it around I'm sure.. This new chip basically = i5 2500k but much better multithreading - a tad worse single threading.

btw wtf why didn't they do that from the start I'm sure Tom would have given it a silver had this been the chip from the start :s His biggest thing seemed to be TDP if I remember correctly.

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/amd_fx_8300_85w_tdp_cpu_released_this_week.html
 
Last edited:
From what I understand, its not a redesigned CPU or anything, just a 8350 with 3.3 base clock instead of 4.0 but the same turbo speed. This should make it about as fast as an 8350 in lightly threaded apps but slower in heavily threaded apps.

I never cared for the power consumption that much myself and think it's importance is overstated. Its like 60 or70 watts more than an equally overclocked i5 and that's about the same as the light bulb I have in my desk lamp. Ill just turn a hallway light off and have the same household power consumption as an Intel user. Now granted this does mean you should spend a little more on a little beefier motherboard and PSU I suppose.
 
Back
Top