I'm a bit confused over this AMD chip. Some are saying it's good but most of the benchmarks and reviews I've seen say otherwise. No doubt the performance per core is a long way behind Intel's Sandy Bridge and later chips. About the only good thing I can see about it is it has 8 cores.
Now I'm not an Intel or AMD fanboy and have built and owned many PCs with both Intel and AMD chips but I have to say I'm disappointed with AMD and impressed with Intel with the current CPUs.
In our Skyrim CPU benchmark, the FX-8350’s poor single-threaded CPU performance really shows through, as it gets comprehensively demolished by the competing Intel chips.
However, again the Core i5-3570K comes out the easy victor, with a minimum frame rate of 28fps at stock and up to 36fps when overclocked. Clearly for those interested in high-performance gaming, the FX-8350 is a sub-standard CPU.
However, the overall result, while not as disheartening as the FX-8150, is still a distant second to Intel’s Core i5-3570K and associated Ivy Bridge architecture.
AMD remains deeply uncompetitive in primarily single threaded applications such as games without offering the significant benefits in multi-threaded applications you’d expect from a chip boasting eight cores. Peak power consumption remains higher than Intel too and it’s these fundamental issues that mean the FX-8350 just isn’t a competitive CPU. Despite the drop in price, there’s almost no reason to opt for the FX-8350 in comparison to the Intel competition.
That is pretty harsh but I have to say I agree with most of it. This is not a good chip for gaming.
Games may use all 8 cores fully in the future but by then Intel will probably make 8 cores or more so where does that leave AMD? I have to say I think this chip from AMD is the worst I've seen from them in a long time. My current CPU is the AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE clocked at 3.9GHz which has been great and good value for money but there's no way I'd buy the FX-8350.