IPC Test 7: AMD FX Series CPUs! How Does it Compare?

We’re finally there. Today we test AMD’s FX CPU series. Both Bulldozer and Piledriver tested. How does it stack up to Intel’s Sandy and Ivy Bridge CPUs?

Help Support Me On Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thegoodoldgamer

Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/thegoodoldgamer?sub_confirmation=1

Share Your Thoughts on Discord: https://discord.gg/KMzGmzb

theGoodOldGamer Amazon Store: https://www.amazon.com/shop/thegoodoldgamer

Previous IPC Tests:
Test 1: Netburst https://youtu.be/bH673lJ090A
Test 1.5: Update https://youtu.be/mFfuvn_N_Qs
Test 2: K8 https://youtu.be/p8EAuscJ4o4
Test 3: Core 2 https://youtu.be/Y1hmVakR56o
Test 4: Phenom I & II https://youtu.be/zlgjIy733rs
Test 5: 1st Gen Core Series https://youtu.be/MgtWxAscqdw
Test 6: Sandy and Ivy Bridge: https://youtu.be/UMrVAGN4SMQ

Test Bench Components:
Thermaltake Core P3 SE Case/Test bench: https://amzn.to/2u1xMeg
Thermaltake TR2 600W PSU: https://amzn.to/2J4kFO2
CoolerMaster TX3 CPU Cooler: https://amzn.to/2MYVS09
CoolerMaster MasterLiquid Lite 120: https://amzn.to/2NMhoGH
Corsair SP120 Performance Fan: https://amzn.to/2L63GA0
PNY 120GB SSD: https://amzn.to/2u43kQE

Sources:
Anandtech: https://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/2

Comments

Pervious says:

now I realize that mine was highly tuned, but I was getting over 120 single thread performance in cinebench and 827 on multithreaded … here is a thread I made showing some of the results of it. https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1637388-fx-giving-bad-fps-here-s-how-tune-your-old-fx-give-better-game-performance.html I have since moved on to Ryzen and am now working on tuning methods on it, but unlike FX, Ryzen is pretty strong on it’s own, just get fast low latency ram and it’s a beast.

mike spikeey says:

i had fx4300 and a AMD Athlon 5350 APU cheap back in 2012/14,,i allso pick up all the fx chips they all think are crap,i got the other day 4300fx $20 boxed in full tower i also picked up 8320 full tower cheap 2x 6cores 1) phenom 2 & fx6300 i happy as fu-k picking up them chips keep slaging them off and ill keep picking them up cheaper

sinephase says:

I ran an FX-6300 @ 4.8Ghz for years and it did very well, and wasn’t difficult to overclock. It worked well and still does if you need a really cheap build. I got it for about $130 CAD. Hard to argue with that at the time 😉

jbres79 says:

Dying for IPC Test 8…… coming soon?

Shawn Burton says:

I didn’t see my desktops cpu anywhere in those graphics which is an i7-4770k.

XMeNN Present says:

fx memory subsystem is weak, as well as performance on the core, which the author wanted to show incomprehensibly, teach the materiel.

fordy929 says:

FX is still a perfectly fine cpu today as long as you keep within its limitations. I was using an FX8320 until just a few months ago, and i still have it as a backup pc today.

Mark Lydon says:

It’s called the fan boy effect. I’m sure glad they were there for AMD back in the day because Intel would now still be dishing out the same old 4 cores chips every 2 to 3 years.

Fabio Francisco says:

Why are you talking about FX in 2018 ????

Fabius Maximus Cunctator says:

Great series, pls keep it up until Ryzen vs Coffee Lake!

Let's Play It From The Beginning says:

Honestly, I have enough of all the videos about how bad FX is. It’s NOT! Yes, go ahead and compare compare compare. Just stupid. If you have an 8350, you are far ahead of your needs. Pair it with a 1060 and all the games will run at 60 fps easily. So what is this all about stupid comparisons? Intel has a huuuuge disadvantage. Every cpu is a new chipset. New board, new cpu… AMD stays with one board and you can use it waaay longer. Hence the “survive” of FX platform. And as I said, FX is good enough. Just use it, play, create. And stop the hype over comparisons.

Kevin Edward says:

I’m still using an 8370 and to be honest they’re not as horrible as people make out… They’re not as awesome as other CPUs but I’m playing modern games perfectly well paired with 1060 6GB and now that games are actually using more cores these days my CPU is doing pretty well, to be honest. With the FX line it really is a case of 8xxx or nothing in my opinion, the 8350 and 8370 being the sweet spot. The 9xxx versions just hit the motherboard VRMs way too hard.

Zangetsu says:

thanks TGOG! really appreciate your IPC videos, because they show the underlying architecture strengths (or weaknesses, in this case). this explains why BullDozer and Piledriver had to run at such high frequencies to compensate.

Larry Gall says:

It’s laughable to see the comment section in here, and quite predictably. Many, many heated arguments about 4/8c, as would be expected. People who have no concept of what physical MT is. It could have worked a bit better if programming had been considerate of the architecture, but why would they in a world dominated by Intel.

DeXTeR says:

FX was dead first day when it came out.

Thomas s says:

Unlike a lot of people i’m not in denial that fx8350 had bad ipc. But at least it stayed viable enough paired with a decent gpu to get 1080P 60, even to this day.
While an intel rig with the same set up could get lets say 89 fps, the fx8350 only got 67fps average , the increase did not matter because vsync would cap it at 60fps anyway.
My rig from 6 years ago: Fx8350, radeon 7970, 16gb ddr3 1866mhz ram, 120gb sata ssd (os), 250gb sata ssd (games) can still hit 1080P 60 max in most of the titles I play. I do not play all the latest titles, but just the fact that this machine is still pulling it off is still amazing. This isn’t praising AMD, but in reality is actually saying how much the market has slowed down in regards to technical progress in games. E-Sports have also gotten more popular which have also made the need to upgrade to better machines unnecessary if you do not care too much about modern AAA titles like I do. I enjoyed Doom 2016, hated Wolfenstein 2, Prey 2017 was excellent, and Dishonored 2 would have been great if not for the poor optimization.
Out the 4 sample AAAish games I listed, only Dishonored 2 gets less than 35fps, although wolfenstein2 only ran a 45 fps on release and has improved greatly since release past the 60fps mark, but Doom 2016 on the same engine as Wolf2 gets 100fps and looks just as good…
I will tell you one thing though I have recently gotten into the Sims 3 again for the first time in like 8-9 years, and oh boy I do not recommend this game to anyone on an AMD CPU due to its poor optimization / only being coded to work on 2 cores with a little third core offset. (although in 2009 being dual-threaded was a big deal, but add 2 expansions into the mix and even my fx8350 runs like a dog when overclocked to 4.5ghz playing it)

With more modern games using more than 4 cores it is holding the fx8350 on life support just a bit longer so I can wait until the 7nm cpus are released, which is what I have been planning on since the first ryzen release.

Robert Loyd says:

Amused that it isn’t titled FX revisited, or something along that line. Still using my FX-8350 to this day, as I lacked the revenue to buy the $1,000 Intel at the time I lofted my PC in the end of 2011. But I also used my 42″ Vizio from the end of 2011 also, but eliminated many players by being able to spot them while they were still down range. Not saying I’m any good, but my gamble won me more hands than the cards I had to play. So in humor… I think this horse is past being beat to death, just burying the poor thing already. Thank you. 🙂

umeng2002 says:

Ain’t no one running those lower end FX CPUs now. Everyone should have an 8-core FX clocked to 4.5 GHz or higher, with 1866 MHz RAM, and other HT and NB overclocks. I went from a 3.2 GHz Phenom II x6 to an OC’d 8-core FX and I noticed a jump in performance. The Phenoms don’t have AVX which is required in a few newer games and it doesn’t have AES crypto acceleration… which now the common standard.

EscapeVelo says:

Just picked up an AMD FX 8350 for $64, brand new from Newegg.

Avro Arrow says:

The reason why it does far worse than anyone expected in the benchmarks is because those numbers have been given an inflated level of relevance. I had an FX-8350 for years and never felt the need to change up until last year when I was offered a deal I couldn’t refuse on an R7-1700. I’m not saying that the FX was as good as any Intel architecture from Sandy Bridge forward, but I will say that those graphs paint a picture of something that is far beyond human perception. My FX-8350 felt like, well, fast CPU, always. The differences that we’re seeing in nanoseconds translate into what would be perceived as identical by the limited human brain. Imagine if the load time of a program on an i7-2600k took two seconds and the FX-8350 took four. Well then, any reviewer with a bit of a flair for showmanship could make a huge chart talking about how the i7-2600k is literally TWICE as fast as the FX-8350 and make a graph that’s a ½km long which would make the difference seem huge when it was two seconds that nobody would notice.

I’d had friends over who had their i7-2600k CPUs and they gamed on my rig, playing games like Arkham Asylum, Arckham Knight, Hitman: Evolution and Deus Ex: Human Revolution. They honestly thought that I had overclocked my FX because they expected my PC to be terrible at gaming because that’s what reviewers like you, Tom’s Hardware, AnandTech, etc. had led them to believe. They were shocked that my “lowly” AMD system was showing FPS numbers that they only dreamed of. Those with the i7-2600k paid $400CAD for their CPUs while those with i5-2500k paid around $350CAD for theirs. They all paid well over $200CAD each for their motherboards.

Meanwhile, I paid just $170CAD for my FX-8350 and $140CAD for my Gigabyte 990FX motherboard (both of which still function perfectly). They also all had GeForce video cards, I believe that the cards they had were GTX 580, GTX 660 and two had the GTX 680. The two that had the GTX 680s were the ones who had i5-2500k CPUs because they had more money left over. Since I had spent so much less on my CPU and motherboard, I was able to pop in twin Gigabyte HD 7970 video cards which meant that my machine, for about the same money, blew theirs completely out of the water because the cost of Intel’s CPUs meant that a lot of gaming PCs were badly unbalanced.

I’ve been building PCs since I was twelve with my first build being a 286-16 after having had an IBM PC model 5150 to play with when my parents upgraded to a 386DX-20. I know that the key to a balanced gaming platform is to be GPU heavy and CPU average. The FX-8350 was more than fast enough to keep out of the way of mt 7970s and not bottleneck them (at least, not in any way that I noticed which is all I care about). The gaming power of twin 7970s was in a completely different level. I could play Arma III at max settings, the 680 could barely play it at medium settings. Gaming-wise, I had more power than the current i7 at the time (I think that it was Devil’s Canyon) with a GTX TITAN (according to 3dMark).

The simple truth is that for gaming, the CPU is not unimportant but it pales in comparison to the importance of the GPU. As long as the CPU can stay out of the GPU’s way, you’re laughing all the way to the bank. I know that I was. 😉

o0ericj0o says:

i thought the fx chips were better than gen 1 i7’s almost upgraded from a i7 860 to a 8350.

Eddie Quist says:

I had to switch to intel, i’m not sure what i’m going to buy next time.

SquidKing says:

Hey! I’m running an fx8350 with an nvidia gtx 1050 which are both considerably overclocked… unfortunately, my motherboard (or maybe cpu) seems to be breaking, and my FPS has decreased by 20 (and ping increased by 30) compared to when I first bought the processor and mobo.
What is a good upgrade to the 8350? Would a Ryzen 5 be a worthy investment?

Matlockization says:

FX series seems to have the biggest gains in DX12. I think the Ryzen architecture is an AMD version of ARM. Apple on the other hand has changed its architecture to suit Apple OS and is two gens ahead of everyone. Moving forward, I hope AMD at the very least can up their IPC to equal if not better Intel.

Anonymous says:

I just built an amd fx8350 with a gigabyte 990x G1 gaming motherboard with a m.2 SSD and a r9 290x (4gb) and 8gb of ddr3 Corsair Vengeance ram and custom cooled it on a cheap budget and the thing runs perfectly fine for gaming and that’s coming from a guy who had a intel i7 4790k with a gtx 1080ti

CK S says:

Will you test Ryzen IPC with ivy bridge , haswell ?

Los M says:

I’m still using the fx8350 from 2014

RogueBrit says:

I’ve only just upgraded from my. Fx 8350 to a Ryzen 7 1800x and I was loath to do it. It still ran all of my games. With a AIO perfectly cool, so you can’t render some worthless cinebench benchmark as fast as other chips but it was a trooper of a chip that really did me proud. A great chip end of

m4N5L4y3R says:

I’m still running a Phenom II x4 960T @3.8GHZ There’s something I’ve always liked about the K10 CPUs

Luredreier says:

11:35
Because you’re just looking at one FX core vs 1 Intel thread while the story looks differently when you do two FX cores on a module vs 1 Intel core with two threads, there the FX series actually does much better.
11:50
Its been years since that was true.
These days most workloads seem to be mainly quad thread heavy with some more threads also being utilized in some applications.

 Write a comment

*

Do you like our videos?
Do you want to see more like that?

Please click below to support us on Facebook!