AMD FX-8350 Vishera 8-Core CPU Review - HotHardware

AMD FX-8350 Vishera 8-Core CPU Review

51 thumbs up

Cinebench R11.5 is a 3D rendering performance test based on Cinema 4D from Maxon. Cinema 4D is a 3D rendering and animation suite used by animation houses and producers like Sony Animation and many others. It's very demanding of processor resources and is an excellent gauge of pure computational throughput.

Cinebench R11.5
3D Rendering

This is a multi-threaded, multi-processor aware benchmark that renders a photorealistic 3D scene (from the viral "No Keyframes" animation by AixSponza). This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores. The rate at which each test system was able to render the entire scene is represented in the graph below.

 

The AMD FX-8350 offers improved performance over the previous-gen FX-8150 in both single and multi-threaded workloads according to Cinebench R11.5. The FX-8350 is also able to overtake the Core i5-3470 in this test and nip at the Core i7's heels.

POV-Ray Performance
Ray Tracing

POV-Ray, or the Persistence of Vision Ray-Tracer, is an open source tool for creating realistically lit 3D graphics artwork. We tested with POV-Ray's standard 'one-CPU' and 'all-CPU' benchmarking tools on all of our test machines, and recorded the scores reported for each. Results are measured in pixels-per-second throughput; higher scores equate to better performance.

POV-Ray proved to be somewhat of a strong point for the new FX-8350. In this benchmark, the FX-8350 once again offers improved single and multi-threaded performance over the FX-8150 and is also able to overtake all of the Intel quad-core processors. Only the 6-core, and much more expensive, Core i7-3960X was faster.
 

Article Index:

1 2 3 Next
0
+ -

results are weird. I5 doing just as well as the i7s in some cases. Are these software tests suitable?

0
+ -

Results are not weird at all. The tests are a combination of single and multi-threaded workloads, and we've got three families / generations of Intel processors represented. In single threaded workloads, the newer Ivy Bridge-based Core i5's are sometimes able to outperform older Sandy Bridge-based chips due to architectural enhancements and higher Turbo speeds. Also note that additional cores and support for HT won't benefit a test that's single or dual-threaded at most.

0
+ -

I just had to make this decision for a client who was having difficulties with her Phenom II 965 system which I recognized because we have the same issues on my system with the same processor and MB and frequent lock ups. This is a different architecture all together from CPU to board to memory bus I know but the price difference for an i7-3820 relative to the productivity it produces for her applications as a professional architect are to good to not go with them. This processor is also a couple weeks to late for the necessity we had at then, either way the price VS the performance makes it irrelevant either way.

0
+ -

rapid1:
either way the price VS the performance makes it irrelevant either way.

Irrelevant?,......I don't think so.

When you consider that most of Intel's latest CPUs require you to buy a new motherboard to go with your shiny new chip, the AM3+ board's ability to run the latest FX processors gains a new clarity.

Even though I already have an FX-4170, I can just buy a FX-8350 CPU and install it and I'm upgraded. I might need a BIOS update, but that's no big deal. The performance isn't what my i7-2600K gets, but it's completely acceptable for my needs.

________________________________

Marco, I have a question,............I've heard it said that Windows eight has optimizations built-in that take advantage of AMD Vishera's newer design. Is this true, or is it just so much BS?

Did you test this CPU with Win-8 to see if it performs better in Win-8 as opposed to Win-7? Are there any plans to do so?

0
+ -

@Realneil - Windows 8 does have updates to the scheduler that should increase performance and efficiency slightly with Bulldozer and Piledriver, but the I haven't done any official testing. Don't expect much of a boost though--a couple of percentage points here and there, tops.

0
+ -

Marco C:
Don't expect much of a boost though--a couple of percentage points here and there, tops.

Thanks for the answer Marco.

I may get one of these FX-8350 CPUs once the prices calm down a little.

0
+ -

Me too, the performance looks good enough for me, but Newegg has them listed for $30 over msrp. Maybe next month will be the time to buy.

0
+ -

CDeeter:

Me too, the performance looks good enough for me, but Newegg has them listed for $30 over msrp. Maybe next month will be the time to buy.

That's why I'm waiting. I don't like the 'brand new' tax either.

 

0
+ -

Ok, so I am in the middle of deciding between this Amd fx 8350 processor and the Intel® Core™ i7 3970X Six-core 3.5GHz/4.0GHz Turbo 15MB L3 Cache w/ HyperThreading. I have been asking a lot of people for their opinion and really want to know, which processor will preform better? Can someone please tell me which processor has better performance? Thanks.

+1
+ -

They both will perform well, but the Intel part is certainly faster.

You already know that you'll pay a hefty price premium for the extra performance though. The motherboard will be more expensive too.

The bottom line is that the AMD setup is plenty good enough for most uses, but the Uber Expensive Intel part that you're comparing it to is the performance king.

1 2 3 Next
Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: