I have never used an FX CPU in my life. I've heard nothing but bad things about the FX chips.
Here's what I've heard: >high power consumption >DIRE performance >will turn your room into a sauna >Certain Phenom IIs in some benchmarks beat certain FX chips
I'm a hardcore AMD fanboy now that Ryzen is out but I'm having a hard time finding any redeemable qualities with Ryzen's predecessor. Was it just a colossal failure? Were they that pathetic? I was living under a rock during the time FX was the newest from AMD and was on Ivy Bridge.
Yes, AMD's consumer CPUs after the Phenom II were atrocious, both FX and the A Series.
Liam Hughes
I had an 8350 , not very good at most games relying on single core performance. It was my computer thoguh so I liked it .
Oliver Hernandez
FX8320 here Upgrading to Ryzen felt like changing seasons. It was hot as balls and all I could ever think was "why didn't I go intel" but then R5 1600 arrived on my doorstep and it's only a distant memory now
Owen Ward
Bulldozer was made for a very limited scope and excelled in that scope. Highly threaded integer heavy computation with little branch prediction, using as little die area as possible. Unfortunately for AMD, that situation does not corrospond to real life.
Power consumption vs performance was quite high when outside of it's "groove", the GloFlo 32nm process was particularly atrocious which did not help. Nah it wouldn't turn a room into a sauna, even the topmost skus would use half of what a top end GPU would. Yes Phenom 2 did beat Bulldozer chips at the same frequency. This is not surprising given they were 3 ALU 3 AGU designs vs the 2 ALU 2 AGU Bulldozer designs. The fact the performance gap is as small as it is at the same frequency is remarkable actually. Float performance was particularly bad, as each module of two cores only had a single float core with an SMT implementation. This means effectively an 8350 had 8 integer cores and 4 floating point cores that could handle another 4 threads at a fraction of the performance.
Camden Fisher
i still have an 8350
i still have a 390x
i still wake up thinking about the day i accidentally ordered an AMD mobo when building my first computer
Jaxon Stewart
fx high power consumption is because amd tends to give a lot of voltage overhead. if you undervolt it will consume way less. my phenom ii 1090t stock at 1.375V. i undervolt it to 1.225V that's a lot. not fx, but you get the gist.
Joshua Jenkins
I had a fx 6300 stock clocks at 3.6 but i had it overclocked to 4.9 near stock voltage, on a hyper t4 and it never went above 50c. It wasnt great at games, did the job and was cheap, but it did do a good job working those six cores.
Kevin Torres
The FX-8350 was and is an incredible cpu. $300 5 years ago and it can still max modern vidya
