Winner
Intel Core i7 4770
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i7 4770 based on its single-core performance and power consumption.
See full details Intel Core i7 4770 vs AMD FX 8350 |
Released June, 2013
Intel Core i7 4770
- 3.4 GHz
- Quad core
8.8 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i7 4770
 | Much lower typical power consumption 68.25W | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,029 |
by Shawn-Baker (Jun, 2013)Overclocking as you'd expect brings with it a performance boost and we look forward to gaining even more MHz off the CPU in the coming weeks as we use the platform more and more, and hence become better skilled at overclocking the new Haswell chips.
VS
Released October, 2012
AMD FX 8350
- 4 GHz
- Octa core
- Unlocked
5.8 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD FX 8350
| | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | | Much better performance per dollar 8.32 pt/$ |
| | Significantly higher clock speed 4 GHz | | Significantly higher turbo clock speed 4.2 GHz |
by Legit Reviews (Oct, 2012)The new AMD 'Piledriver' modules are essentially revamped 'Bulldozer' cores.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4770 vs 8350 among desktop CPUs (over 75W)
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Fire Strike | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 8.8 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 68.25W | vs | 159.66W | 2.3x lower typical power consumption | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,029 | vs | 1,525 | Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| 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 $/year | 2.2x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Significantly better PassMark score | 9,523 | vs | 9,134 | Around 5% better PassMark score | |||
| Much better performance per watt | 11.02 pt/W | vs | 5.84 pt/W | Around 90% better performance per watt | |||
| Newer | Jun, 2013 | vs | Oct, 2012 | Release date 7 months later | |||
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 1 MB | 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much better performance per dollar | 8.32 pt/$ | vs | 3.37 pt/$ | Around 2.5x better performance per dollar | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 4 GHz | vs | 3.4 GHz | Around 20% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 4.2 GHz | vs | 3.9 GHz | Around 10% higher turbo 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 | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 8.79 GHz | vs | 4.04 GHz | Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.73 GHz | vs | 3.86 GHz | Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 4770 vs FX 8350
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i7 4770 | vs | FX 8350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 4 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 4.2 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Octa core | |
| Is unlocked | No | Yes | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AVX 1.1 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| F16C | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| XOP | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| EM64T | |||
| SSE | |||
| ABM | |||
| BMI1 | |||
| CLMUL | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| FMA3 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| CVT16 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| TBM | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
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 | 11.02 pt/W | 5.84 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 68.25W | 159.66W | |
details | Core i7 4770 | vs | FX 8350 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 8 | 8 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 8 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 32 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72.72°C | Unknown - 61°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.86 GHz | 4.73 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.04 GHz | 8.79 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 3,086.9 | 10,147 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.86 GHz | 4.73 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| 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 | |||
| DDR3L-1600 | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 29,866.66 MB/s | |
 Intel Core i7 4770  Report a correction |  AMD FX 8350 Report a correction |
Desktops
Looking for a desktop?
- 23 desktops with the Intel Core i7 4770, starting from $959
- 4 desktops with the AMD FX 8350, starting from $899
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $128 | $227 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i5 6600K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $378 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i7 6700K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $180 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs 8370 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $401 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i5 6500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $957 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i7 3770K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $100 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs 6300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $128 | $185 | |
| AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i5 6400 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS | |
| $272 | $378 | |
| Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
| | VS | |
| $227 | $378 | |
| Intel Core i5 6600K vs i7 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 5200U vs AMD A8 7410 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $665 | |
| Intel Core i5 5200U vs 6200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $665 | $746 | |
| Intel Core i5 6200U vs i7 6500U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $161 | |
| Intel Core i5 5200U vs Pentium N3700 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
