Ok so I know this had been asked a million times but if I want to know how each of them would compare. I would most likely overclock the 4670k to 4.2 ghz with a hyper 212 but if I went with the and fx 8350 I would probably get in the 4.8 range due to better cooling from the save money from the 4670k. Most gaming on new titles, some photoshop and Adobe work and Sony Vegas video rendering. Thanks
More cores for rendering 8350 by far, end of story let the thread die here.
Both capable CPUs. Pure editing, I would lean to the 8350. Depending on your specific choice of games, the Intel might be better. It's a toss up, to be honest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_izvAbhExY
My 4670K outperformed my 8150 in most tasks. The 8350 isnt much better than the 8150.
Also, if you say you know the question has been asked. please actually SEARCH AND FIND THE OTHER THREADS.
We don't need tons of the same questions being asked.
Also, 4.8 is very hard to get to anymore, with that chip. seeing as how the high binned chips are being used as the 9 series CPUs.
It will all depend on what you're going to do with your computer. Sorry I can't really help.
In 90% of the current games you won't see a difference in performance, so I would go for the cheaper 8350, or the 8320 if you want to save some more.
The i5 is more consistent across games. While the FX will have worse performance in many games, it will still provide playable performance. However, there's the occasional game (like Arma) where the FX will perform really poorly, whereas the i5 will still perform fairly well.
Alright thanks
Battlefield 4. Titanfall. Watch Dogs. Grid 2. Black Mesa...etc
I know the question has been asked before but it is usually asked about stock speeds not 4.2ghz 4670k vs 4.8 ghz 8350
Alright thanks for input
Hmmm. Decisions decisions.
The i5 is more consistent ergo better. Would you rather good performance in every single game or good performance in some games and terrible performance in others? Also I have a stock 4670k and it renders a good deal faster than my friends OC'ed 8350 (Quick Sync ftw).
Z87 is also better than 990FX.
Thats interesting that it renders better. I thought the 8350 oc'd would be a lot better for video editing and rendering.
Most CPUs would be competitive in any of those listed games. No noticeable difference between top-end Intel or AMD.
Overclock and thread count mean nothing. You have to consider other things. Different software suites will be "geared" to work better on certain architectures. The 8350 can beat the i7 in some applications. Though, very few. The i7, or the i5, would be better in many others. It's your choice of software that provides the best choice.
I would lean 4670k given what you have said in terms of what will give the better overall experience for you(within the vacuum of information you have provided) . In Adobe software the 4670k will have the advantage. In older games and poorly optimized games the 4670k will have the advantage and in newer multi-threaded titles it will vary from small advantage Intel to small advantage AMD. I cant say anything about Sony Vegas. The fx8350 might be faster there. It Isn't faster in premiere but Vegas might push the cores to a greater extent.
All that said in most cases the differences aren't really all that noticeable either way and the fx8350 is going for $160(amazon) vs the $230 for the i5 which could mean a better video card or a build with an ssd or many other little tweaks that would make a AMD build more desirable. But if it is simply fx 8350 or 4670k and the only difference it will make to your build out side of the cpu is the quality of the heatsink then I would say go with the 4670k.
Guys stop screaming 4670k. Look at the original question. Its a rig that'll be used for video editing and rendering. The 4 extra cores on the 8350 make it the only choice in this price range. Sony Vegas will love extra cores. Adobe stuff will be faster on the Intel, but not like the major increase you'll get in Vegas. Older games who cares. They'll fly on both because they're older games. Arma is something to think about if your a major player. And really games are going to 8 core optimization very quickly because the new consoles have 8 core AMD processors. So the problem of games being poorly optimized will be a problem that takes care of it self very quickly.
+1
So many many people laughed at me when I bought my 8120 back in 2012. Well, that same 8120 is easily OC'd and the extra cores mean a big difference in a lot of the new releases coming out. I don't buy my hardware for what I'm going to need now, if possible I buy it for longevity.