CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4440 vs 8350

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Core i5 4440
7.2
FX 8350
7.9
Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Core i5 4440
9.2
FX 8350
8.4
Passmark (Single Core)

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?
Core i5 4440
6.7
FX 8350
9.9
Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 1 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Core i5 4440
7.4
FX 8350
7.3
Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value
Core i5 4440
8.0
FX 8350
8.1

Winner
AMD FX 8350 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 8350  based on its overclocking.

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

Intel Core i5 4440

Front view of Intel Core i5 4440
Front view of AMD FX 8350

AMD FX 8350

CPUBoss Winner
Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 4440

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4440

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 68.25W vs 159.66W 2.3x lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,891 vs 1,525 Around 25% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per watt 11.87 pt/W vs 5.31 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year vs 56.1 $/year 2.8x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year vs 159.62 $/year 2.2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Marginally newer Jul, 2013 vs Oct, 2012 Release date 8 months later
Front view of AMD FX 8350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8350

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 25% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly higher clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 30% higher clock speed
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score 10,147 vs 3,691.6 Around 2.8x better PassMark (Overclocked) score
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.74 GHz vs 3.29 GHz Around 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark score 9,134 vs 6,500 More than 40% better PassMark score
Better geekbench (32-bit) score 11,100 vs 9,234 More than 20% better geekbench (32-bit) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.98 GHz vs 3.1 GHz More than 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 4440 vs FX 8350

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 4440
9,234
FX 8350
11,100
browser.primatelabs.com

GeekBench

Core i5 4440
9,234
FX 8350
12,796

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i5 4440
6,390
FX 8350
6,880
Core i5 4440 FX 8350 @ community.futuremark.com
The FX-8350 also gave us some significant gains in 3DMark 11.
FX 8350 | by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)

Passmark

Core i5 4440
6,500
FX 8350
9,134
Core i5 4440 FX 8350 @ cpubenchmark.net
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)

Passmark (Single Core)

Core i5 4440
1,891
FX 8350
1,525
cpubenchmark.net
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 Tech Radar (Nov, 2012)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Core i5 4440  vs
FX 8350 
Clock speed 3.1 GHz 4 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.3 GHz 4.2 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Is unlocked No 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 1,100 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

 Core i5 4440  vs
FX 8350 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
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 3.29 GHz 4.74 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.1 GHz 4.98 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 3,691.6 10,147
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.29 GHz 4.74 GHz

power consumption
TDP 84W 125W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 56.1 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 159.62 $/year
Performance per watt 11.87 pt/W 5.31 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 159.66W
Intel Core i5 4440
Report a correction
AMD FX 8350
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Jwow (08:22 PM, March 31, 2014)
I think this is biased and more people will be happier with the i5 due to brand loyalty and the fact you don't have to touch any settings and the Intel wins by default.
comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss
Rebellion Media Technology