How much this matters depends on what sort of workloads are run and how active the CPU typically is. Under load, this changes-the Intel CPU tops out at 126W, while AMD's FX-8350 pulls 230W. At idle, the difference between the FX-8350 and Core i5-3550 isn't that large the Intel chip draws 58W while the AMD CPU draws 74W. Power consumption is another area where Intel's Core i5-3550 is on stronger footing than AMD. Here, the Core i5-3550, AMD FX-8350, and FX-8150 essentially tied, at 86, 85, and 84 FPS respectively. The one exception to the rule was Battlefield 3, which tends to stress graphics cards more than CPUs. Batman: Arkham City also showed the Intel Core i5-3550 well ahead of the AMD FX-8350, with a score of 85 fps compared with 72 fps, respectively. In The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, the Core i5-3550 managed an average 102 fps (frames per second), while the FX-8350 came in at 75 fps and the FX-8150 at 69 fps. Gaming performance, however, generally favors Intel. The AMD FX-8350 is a bit behind the Intel i5-3550 in general application work, with a PCMark 7 score of 4922 compared to the i5-3550's 5210, but the gap is small enough that you wouldn't likely notice. It's also faster than the Intel i5-3550 in Cinebench with a score of 6.93 compared to the i5-3550's 5.95. AMD's FX-8350's eight-core configuration made it significantly faster than the Intel Core i5-3550 in rendering tests it took 275 seconds to render our test scene in Maxwell Render 2.5.0 as compared to the i5-3550's 357 seconds. Other tests show similar differences the FX-8350 is roughly 10 percent faster than the CPU it replaces.Īgainst Intel's Core i5-3550, the news is more mixed. In POV-RAY's rendering benchmark, the FX-8350 takes 49.5 seconds to complete the test, compared to 57 seconds for the FX-8150. Single-threaded performance is also up to 1.11 as opposed to the FX-8150's 1.03. The size of the increase depends on the test in question in Cinebench 11.5's multi-threaded test, the FX-8350 turns in a score of 6.93 compared to the FX-8150's 6.01. The FX-8350's increased clock speed and improved efficiency make it faster than the old FX-8150 across the board. Intel's first unlocked CPU, the Core i7-3570K, is $30 more expensive. That's an option that could appeal to enthusiasts who want to try their hand at squeezing more performance out of the CPU. The AM3+ platform supports up to DDR3-1866 and the FX-8350 CPU has an unlocked multiplier. The FX-8350 retains the same AM3+ socket that AMD launched last year with Bulldozer any motherboard that supported the earlier FX processors will support the new chips as well, provided the manufacturer releases a BIOS update. Intel CPUs have fewer cores, but the performance of each individual core tends to be higher. As a result, AMD and Intel CPUs are no longer strictly comparable on a core-to-core level. While this has allowed AMD to pack more cores into the same space, it's also impacted the performance of each particular core.
Like the older AMD FX-8150, the FX-8350 is designed to share certain assets to reduce the CPU's size, manufacturing complexity, and production costs.
#What does your 8350 get on intel burn test software#
0 kommentar(er)
