CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 8350 vs 4350 among desktop CPUs (over 75W)

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

FX 8350
8.8
FX 4350
4.4
FX 6300
6.1
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

FX 8350
7.2
FX 4350
7.3
FX 6300
4.9
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

FX 8350
0.0
FX 4350
0.0
FX 6300
0.0
Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

FX 8350
0.0
FX 4350
0.0
FX 6300
0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

FX 8350
5.3
FX 4350
4.6
FX 6300
5.0
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

FX 8350
6.1
FX 4350
6.9
FX 6300
5.8
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5.6

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

FX 8350
5.6
FX 4350
5.0
FX 6300
4.8

Winner
AMD FX 8350 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 8350  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD FX 8350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8350

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 8350 Black Edition vs the 4350.

Front view of AMD FX 4350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 4350

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 4350 vs the 8350 Black Edition.

Benchmarks Real world tests of FX 8350 vs 4350

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8350
11,483
FX 4350
6,444

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8350
2,193
FX 4350
2,207

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8350
2,470,000 MB/s
FX 4350
2,430,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8350
10,956
FX 4350
6,124

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

FX 8350
12,126
FX 4350
6,828

GeekBench

FX 8350
12,796
FX 4350
6,828

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

FX 8350
9,134
FX 4350
5,302

PassMark (Single Core)

FX 8350
1,525
FX 4350
1,527

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

FX 8350  vs
4350 
Clock speed 4 GHz 4.2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz 4.3 GHz
Cores Octa core Quad core
Socket type
AM3+
Is unlocked Yes Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

details

FX 8350  vs
4350 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 4
L2 cache 8 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 0 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 0 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 1,200,000,000 1,200,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Die size 319 mm² 319 mm²
Clock multiplier 21 21
Voltage range 0.81 - 1.45V 0.81 - 1.45V
Operating temperature Unknown - 61°C Unknown - 61.1°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.69 GHz 4.93 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 8.79 GHz 5.18 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.69 GHz 4.93 GHz

power consumption

TDP 125W 125W
Annual home energy cost 56.1 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 159.62 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 5.72 pt/W 7.75 pt/W
Typical power consumption 159.66W 101.56W

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 29,866.66 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
AMD FX 8350
Report a correction
AMD FX 4350
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 5 comments.
FX4350 is an amazing and quite faster processor for gaming than the old one. http://mutilateadoll2.info/
From what I've seen, it really depends on the game if it's optimised or not.
That's not the whole reason. As i understand it, the 8350 and the 4350 has identical cores, the 8350 just happens to have twice as many of them. So the performance in games should be identical if the game only requires 4 cores to run accurate, in practice that is. The thing is that, while the 8350 has 8 integer cores and 8 L1 data cashes which makes it an Octa-Core CPU. But both the 8350 and the 4350 have 4 Floating Point Units, 4 L2 and 4 L3 data cashes each. This means that 2 cores on the 8350 must share the same FPU at any given time. So the 8350 actually has 8 cores bundled in 4 modules where only 1 core in each module can use the FPU at a time. This is the main limiting factor when it comes to gaming, since all 8 cores on the 8350 do not have undisturbed access to the FPU units and thus cannot be utilized to their full potential. While the 4350 has as many cores as it has FPU's and data cashes which means they should have a lot higher Floating Point Performance per core, in theory. Here is a tip if you're using the 8350 (Like i do currently) It is possible to "amp up" the performance in single-threaded games and programs that uses 4 cores or less on the FX 8350 to some degree by setting the affinity in the task manager in windows to run a program on the cores: 0, 2, 4 and 6. Then set less important programs to run from the cores: 1, 3, 5 and 7. I used to do this and i works quite well.
Main reason it'll be faster for games is becos games use maximum 4 cores right now, and so the whole fx 4350 cpu will be used, check out the cpu usage when playing games vs the fx 8350. Performance is much better for gaming on the fx 4350 side.
interesting, the 4350 might actually be faster for games than the 8350 (at std clock speed), with more cache per core, higher turbo freq, hence slightly better single core performance.
comments powered by Disqus