8350 vs 4690 on a 970 (Good God)

I've been seeing constant threads about the 8350 being bashed versus Intel's offerings, and this is throwing a lot of my perceptions of what to build my new rig on into question. I have an 8350 right now, and I was told to get a 4590 for my future build, pairing it with a GTX 970. But...

I've been hearing nothing but how poorly the 8350 was handled for gaming, and its tech is old, and that it's not optimized for a lot of stuff. Then I hear that it's just fine and the issues are minor, and it depends on what you want for your computer. I use my computer for internet, YouTube watching, and gaming. I do very little else. I don't video render, I don't 3D render or animate, and I don't Twitch stream. This is key to making this decision.

Benchmarks still go in favour of the 8350 I find, so I'm confused and conflicted. I also see a ton of He said/She said here bout the 8350 argument, so I wanna see this be a sort of more definitive decision on the matter. I want no biases if possible. Let me hear it guys!

Then main difference between the two for your case is the Single core performance. The 8350 has more cores and thus can exploit parallel execution of workloads much better but the Inter i5 (that has relatively the same price) has less cores but better single core performance.

In other words applications that are not designed to use more cores (the dev has to do this explicitly. It is not trivial) will run better on an i5, while if you want to run many applications simultaneously or run stuff that can exploit the extra cores the AMD does brilliantly.

Games currently are mostly using only one core. So for gaming at the moment if you look at a benchmark like here:


You should look at the single threaded performance. There the i5 is definitely better even though the AMD will do generally better all around. This of course will be the case until games developers decide to start generally exploiting multiple cores (very few do at the moment). But personally I do not see it happening before your next need to upgrade (provided you buy the system now).

So for a strictly gaming PC that you do not intend to use it for anything else but this and have no need to use multiple applications running or rendering or virtualization etc the i5 is a better choice (if you find the price satisfying. The AMD is still cheaper) .

That being said the AMD is still more than capable to handle 1080p gaming, so if you chose it (because you prefer the price or want to keep your options open for the future) you still will not have any problems.

1 Like

Well, I intend on having Skype, iTunes, and maybe another program open like Chrome while gaming XD But nothing heavily intensive (Besides Skype I mean). Dunno if that'll change much

Nah these should not matter much. I am taking about heavy stuff. Unless you open 50 tabs constantly on chrome or sth it does not change much.

When talking about the speed/performance of an 8350 compared with an i5 we're not really talking about a huge difference. Both are seriously fast CPUs. As @turin123 already outlined, you need to be doing an awful lot of processing before it is realisable to a human being that one is slower or faster than the other.

However, if you are a Linux guy who likes to run multiple virtual machines (VM), there is a benefit from those extra cores available with the 8350. If you throw in that you are going to run those VMs using QEMU & KVM, then there's a possible advantage in that not all Intel CPUs support VT-d which is required for VGAPassthrough, though in your case the i5 4590k definitely does.

Link: https://wiki.debian.org/VGAPassthroug

If you're not into Linux, but run Windows then the i5 maybe be slightly better bet. Windows is optimised for Intel CPUs, but again it would be hard to spot this marginal speed advantage in normal usage. With either CPU, on Linux you can compile from source to squeeze out every last drop of performance from your chosen beast.

Of course there is the advantage of the AMD CPU with regards to price.

If you are really worried, then go for an i7/X99 rig, then at least you'll be able to sleep at night. That is, until the next faster than a fast thing turns up!

What has been said already is pretty much true. you can use this http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1198 to compare many different cpu's they don't have the 4590 but they did have 4690 which just barely eaks buy the 8350.

Since you already have the 8350 just buy a gtx 980 without spending the extra for more parts you'll probably be better off. especially with D12 games reducing cpu overhead.

1 Like

in terms of gaming, it depends allot on which games you play and how you play them.

But basicly you can say that the haswell i5 is a better allround chip for gaming.
With allround, i mean every game, and every gaming scenario.
This is simply because most todays games dont realy use more then 4 main threads, since the haswell i5 has better per core performance, and better ipc, this automaticly means, that it will perform better in most games on the minimum frame rates.
Especialy in cpu demending games like mmo´s.

But like i said it highly depends from game to game, if its realy noticable or not.

i5-4590 has better raw IPC than FX-8350 period!

The thing is, both can play game very well. 8350 starts to show its limitation on games that are CPU intensive, like MMOs and open world games even Battlefield 4 multiplayer, I actually have some slow frames when playing Warframe.

In CSGO my AMD FX8350 + GTX780 RIG can only score about 150-200FPS while my i7 + 970M laptop can score more than 250FPS stable with no drops.

If you play a lot of MMO then you are much better off with i5. If not, you can save for FX8350 if you really want to, DX12 is ridiculous considering how cheap FX are. And DX12 games are coming this holiday.

One of the reasons that sparked all of this research was that my roommate wanted to buy my CPU off of me. Since I was interested in doing a hardware upgrade, including a case and GPU, I felt this would be a good chance to look at some possibly better options that would earn more strength than what I have now, without spending more than $300 in stuff. And based on the cost numbers I see, I can do this rather easily.

In the case of D12, it's probably true that the CPU won't be as important. But then we look at the rest of what I plan on using my computer for and it makes me wonder if the i5 will still do a better job. And based on some numbers and benchmarks, it looks extremely close in some ways like multi-threading and tech, and in others like single core performance... Well, you know how that goes.

Of course, one must ask just how much of a difference I'll actually notice on a day to day basis.

I always go Intel and nvida. but I always get near top end like my last pc that is now my server was a i7 870 with a 570(back when i was in highschool) and now my new machine is an i7 4790k and a 980 and the only thing i will have to upgrade in the future will be the video card and possibly go up to 16GB of ram.

Do you play Arma at all? if you do or plan to. go Intel from what i have read it is not as good on amd stuff. I have no experience with it so idk how big of an issue it really is.

i mean my [email protected] 4.0Ghz will beat the amd fx 9590 @ 4.7Ghz which is there current fastest from factory 8 core vs my quad core with hyper threading.

also my cpu is 88w that 8 core is 220w

My numbers are purely off of the amd site for the fastest core clock.



I do not play ARMA, actually. It's not often I throw anything too intensive at my current rig, but with a better GPU, I might start testing the waters with more games than I'm generally interested in.

Also, yeah, the heat and power consumption is a pretty big difference. Now, I do have a question... Are the age old rumors of Nvidia+Intel and AMD+AMD being best paired up together still existing? I remember way back years ago this was one of the biggest discussed things, but I dunno if that even holds up anymore these days

I don't think you will have an issue with ether one, Me personally I go with the i7 because I do things like vm's and coin mining n crap like that and i like that its only 88w vs something that is way more power hungry and still doesn't do as good as the little 88w chip.

It all comes down to do you want to spend the extra cash for the Intel or not. Is the Intel faster.. Marginally in some applications.

I am not sure about the matching of brands thing, I do know that amd drivers are kinda meh nowadays.

I'm not worried about the $50 difference or so between the 8350 or 4690. I'm trying to squeeze out the best computer I can get for the cost, considering $800 or so of it is gonna be handled entirely thanks to my roommate

If you want every last bit of performance then Intel is the only choice.

Thanks for the help then~

Not at all. It is a myth if there ever was one. Even back then. Every combination works fine.

If the 50 extra bucks is a issue for you then go for the AMD. Even if there is a noticeable difference you will not have an issue for 1080p gaming (I would rather spend the extra 50 on the GPU than the CPU). If the extra 50 is not a big point then certainly go for the Intel.

The fx8350 is a work horse. It keeps up with the i5 and beats in some cases. If you have a fx8350 there is no reason to upgrade, Win 10 and DX12 come out later this year the 8 core will be better utilized and you'll be glad you kept it. Intel is just not worth the money if your just gaming.

Read the thread. Educate yourself. It's 15 days cold, too, FYI.

1 Like

Yeeaahhh, old thread dude. Still getting e-mails it seems. And, of course, the rest of the thread has proven itself in many ways. My decision has long since been made (No offense to the AMD icon you've got). Thanks though