AMD FX 8350 

What is retarded is that people think that TDP relates directly to power bill. TDP is heat output and how it relates to power consumption depends on efficiency.

I LOVE IT TOO :3

Says the person that cannot even spell "Yourself", LOL Hilarious!!

I always have owned Intel for as long I can remember and have been happy with the performance until 2012 I found myself wanting to build a new rig! So I also always bought a dual core because the were the only Intel chip I could afford an have somewhat all around performance for gaming and surfing the kids never complained. So at work we use quads to develop cad programs to build some precision stuff! Making a long story short a buddy of mine came over and I asked him if he wanted to Canada Computers and help me build a home rig! He brought up the Idea of trying AMD and that I would save some bucks so I said lets check it out. We ended up with FX 8350, Gigabyte FX990 UD3 rev3 16gb Corsair Vengeance, Kingston Hyper FuryX 250gb SSD, Asus Xonar St soundcard, Gigabyte R9 290X last but not least EVGA 750 w Modular PSU! Bill came to a little over 1200.00 Now in 2012 that wasn't half bad considering both the GPU and sound card were over 600.00. I have to say my intel rig bill was 800.00 and change! So I new I was going to here it from the wife when I got home! Well the kids love it, the wife loves it. I can run my cad on it it is surprisingly quick to this day.my son and I both love to game so I pulled r9 290x to a friend and picked up an HIS Roaring RX480. That CPU is still running new most demanding titles 65 Fps or better. If this Family computer last 1 more year it will be the longest lasting family PC ever! So I definitely be waiting for Ryzen and AM4 mini ITX. Do not get me wrong for the right price I would by Kaby Lake but I have to say not really much difference then Sky lake and for the me my experience overall with amd has been a good one and Fx 8350 has real good and reliable CPU for our family.

Best for price for its time :-)

It´s RETARDED how biased this site is.

No, actually in many game engines, physics calculations are in fact done on the GPU via shaders, this is especially true of shadows and particles. An example of this would be PhysX, but many game engines do this.

Cpu is for physics calculation, shadows, particles, etc in games

For what I use it for (SpaceEngine) My FX 8350 (Core @4.2ghz base, NB @2.31ghz and HT Bus speed @2.73ghz) outshines most Intel processors by a long shot.

Kill yourlsef, plz

It's actually the world record according to this: http://valid.canardpc.com/records.php This is liquid nitrogen, however, and the description says water. Highly doubtful that this is possible on water.

Funny if you look at the 5930K the annual bill is $30 a year with a 140W TDP. Then you go to this and the annual usage is $56 a year with a 125W

this is greater

Witcher 3 runs amazing on a FX 8350.I just want to see all games run as well as Witcher 3.

lol, that's exactly what I have, it works great, I can run the witcher 3 on ultra at 45 fps even with nvidia hairworks aa at 8

Liquid Nitrogen is one HELL of a coolant

Because at the time that didn't exist :D

why 290x why not get a 980ti at that price or amd Fury?

My only question is who the heck got the OC (water) over 8ghz?????

explain why low end procc will affect fps. then you will find your statement is not true. i mean not 100% true. maybe 90%...

Actually no, gaming graphics are about GPU, CPU is everything else in the game. Including loading and unloading data. I have tested this, with same gpu different cpu on game performance.

Some of the enthusiast crowd keeps going "Intel" this and "Intel" that. Yes. they're faster. They're also more expensive for the performance you're getting per unit. On a budget? Want most of the "real" speed that Intel's offering, but can't justify the 100-400 dollars more? This is where you're going to find it. Gaming's more about the GPU in many cases than the CPU. Other things may/may not be better on Intel, but in the end, even most of those have went the way of GPU boost and you have to ask yourself if you need (not want...everyone wants... I want the top-end Xeon speeds- but I'm not shelling out $6k per processor for it unless I won the powerball or megamillions...) that muscle or not and whether your applications gain from CPU muscle or GPU muscle. If it's the latter, why spend another couple hundred on that 10-15% boost over this and either pocket the difference or plunk it down on a bruiser of a GPU which might gain you 25% or more on things? It should be noted that I've got both brands in my house and my desktop's an 2700k i7 and the server (and soon the kid's machine) is an AMD- because of the above mentioned thinking. I needed the extra boost for what I was doing at the time I built my desktop. If I'm building a new one, at the domains I can justify expenses, the decision's a push except for cost. AMD's going to be slightly cheaper.

I'm normally an Intel guy because single core performance is really important to me. But for multicore applications, this and the FX-6300 are absolutely ideal. I built a PC for a friend recently, and we have the FX-8350 overclocked to 4.5 GHz using the Corsair H80i with SP120 fans. He is running two ASUS R9 290x DCU II's in crossfire on the MSI 970 Gaming AM3+ motherboard. 16GB of 1600 MHz G.skill. Awesome machine for like 1500-1600 bucks. Haven't observed any throttling like the charlatans saying that the FX8350 throttles multi GPU set-ups. That may be the case for Nvidia GPU's, but these 290x's are blazing!

the best processor overall(general) pair it with r9 290x 8gb ram and you are going to heaven

that's was great gamer for impressive!!!!