AMD FX-6350
vs
AMD FX-8350
vs
7
8
Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game FX-6350 FX-8350

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD FX-8350 is massively better than the AMD FX-6350 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The FX-8350 was released less than a year after the FX-6350, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings (assuming they are accompanied by equivalently powerful GPUs).

The FX-8350 has 2 more cores than the FX-6350. 8 cores is probably excessive if you mean to just run the latest games, as games are not yet able to harness this many cores. The cores in the FX-6350 is more than enough for gaming purposes. However, if you intend on running a server with the FX-8350, it would seem to be a decent choice.

The FX-8350 has 2 more threads than the FX-6350. Both CPUs have one thread per physical core.

Multiple threads are useful for improving the performance of multi-threaded applications. Additional cores and their accompanying thread will always be beneficial for multi-threaded applications. Hyperthreading will be beneficial for applications optimized for it, but it may slow others down. For games, the number of threads is largely irrelevant, as long as you have at least 2 cores (preferably 4), and hyperthreading can sometimes even hit performance.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The FX-6350 and the FX-8350 are from the same family of CPUs, and thus their clock speeds are directly comparable. With this in mind, it is safe to say that with a 0.1 GHz faster base clock rate, the FX-8350 manages to provide marginally better performance than the FX-6350. However, the manages to eke GHz higher frequency when being stressed.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The FX-8350 has a 2048 KB bigger L2 cache than the FX-6350, and the two CPUs have the same L3 cache size, so the FX-8350 wins out in this area with its larger L2 cache.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

Both the FX-6350 and the FX-8350 have the same TDP of 125 Watts, and were created with the same manufacturing size of 32 nm, which means they will affect your yearly electricity bill about equally.

Can I Run It

Check any game system requirements

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameVisheraVishera
MoBo SocketSocket AM3+Socket AM3+
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date01 Oct 201223 Oct 2012
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores6vs8
CPU Threads6vs8
Clock Speed3.9 GHzvs4 GHz
Turbo Frequency4.2 GHzvs4.2 GHz
Max TDP125 Wvs125 W
Lithography32 nmvs32 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs64 Bit
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size288 KBvs384 KB
L2 Cache Size6144 KBvs8192 KB
L3 Cache Size8 MBvs8 MB
Memory Channels-vs2
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Battlefield 4vs
Battlefield 3vs
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordorvs
The Elder Scrolls Vvs
Far Cry 4vs
Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewFX-6350 is a high-end CPU based on the 32nm Bulldozer architecture.

It offers 6 Physical Cores (6 Logical), initially clocked at 3.9GHz, which may go up to 4.2GHz and 8MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 125W.

It is a powerful Hexa Core whose performance is good. It's thus capable of running most applications smoothly without any problem.
FX-8350 is a high-end CPU based on the 32nm Piledriver architecture.

It offers 8 Physical Cores (8 Logical), initially clocked at 4.0GHz, which may go up to 4.2GHz and 8MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 125W.

Compared to its competitor Core i7-3770K it performs around 12% worse. Still, its performance is very good and sufficient for extreme gaming.

Title

Body