Winner
Intel 4690K
CPUBoss recommends the Intel 4690K based on its .
See full details| | Intel 4690K vs AMD FX 8350 |
| | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Much lower typical power consumption 71.5W | | Better PassMark (Single core) score 2,253 |
| | Higher clock speed 4 GHz | | Higher turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz |
| | Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score 10,147 | | More cores 8 |
by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)Having eight cores at 4GHz is impressive, after all it wasn't that long ago that we were striving to break 4GHz when overclocking.
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Value | |
Intel 4690KCPUBoss Winner | | |
| |||||||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 71.5W | vs | 159.66W | 2.2x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,253 | vs | 1,525 | Around 50% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Significantly better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | 7,619 | vs | 4,338 | More than 75% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score | |||
| More l3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 50% more l3 cache per core | |||
| Better performance per watt | 13.33 pt/W | vs | 5.05 pt/W | Around 2.8x better performance per watt | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 21.2 $/year | vs | 56.1 $/year | 2.6x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Marginally newer | Apr, 2014 | vs | Oct, 2012 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 77.09 $/year | vs | 159.62 $/year | 2.1x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Better cinebench r10 32Bit score | 27,090 | vs | 22,674 | Around 20% better cinebench r10 32Bit score | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 4 GHz | vs | 3.5 GHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 4.2 GHz | vs | 3.9 GHz | Around 10% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score | 10,147 | vs | 4,652.1 | Around 2.2x better PassMark (Overclocked) score | |||
| More cores | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better PassMark score | 9,134 | vs | 7,773 | Around 20% better PassMark score | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.99 GHz | vs | 4.67 GHz | More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
FX 8350 | by Tech Radar (Nov, 2012)In Cinebench the AMD chip is only a little over 5 per cent slower, and in X264 there's less than a single per cent difference between them.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)Looking at the physics score we can see a difference of just under 900 points with the AMD FX-8350 taking the lead with 7325 3DMarks.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)The FX-8350 also gave us some significant gains in 3DMark 11.
summary | 4690K | vs | FX 8350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 4.2 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Octa core | |
| Is unlocked | Yes | Yes | |
| Is hyperthreaded | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AVX | |||
| XOP | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| F16C | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics 4600 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,200 MHz | N/A | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1866 | |||
| DDR3-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
details | 4690K | vs | FX 8350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 8 | |
| L3 cache | 6 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.57 GHz | 4.7 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.67 GHz | 4.99 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 4,652.1 | 10,147 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.57 GHz | 4.7 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 88W | 125W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 21.2 $/year | 56.1 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 77.09 $/year | 159.62 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 13.33 pt/W | 5.05 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 71.5W | 159.66W | |
| Intel 4690K | AMD FX 8350 |
| VS | |
| $235 | $177 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $325 | $177 | |
| Intel Core i7 4770K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $330 | $177 | |
| Intel Core i7 3770K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $143 | $177 | |
| AMD FX 8320 vs 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $230 | $177 | |
| Intel Core i5 3570K vs AMD FX 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $160 | $177 | |
| AMD A10 7850K vs FX 8350 | ||
| VS | |
| $235 | $240 | |
| Intel Core i5 4670K vs 4690K | ||
| VS | |
| $253 | $325 | |
| AMD FX 9590 vs Intel Core i7 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $161 | $225 | |
| Intel N3530 vs Core i3 3110M | ||
| VS | |
| $340 | $325 | |
| Intel 4790K vs Core i7 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $97 | $281 | |
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
| VS | |
| $225 | ||
| Intel Celeron N2830 vs Core i3 3217U | ||
| VS | |
| $378 | ||
| Intel Core i7 4700MQ vs AMD A10 5750M | ||
| VS | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 vs Samsung Exynos 5 Octa | ||