Testseek.es han recogido 266 las revisiones expertas de el AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz Socket AM3 Plus y el grado medio es el 79%. Enrolle abajo y vea todas las revisiones para AMD FX-8350 4.0GHz Socket AM3 Plus.
July 2015
(79%)
266 Críticas
Puntuación media de los expertos que han realizado una crítica del producto.
Usuarios
(93%)
2719 Críticas
Puntuación media de los propietarios del producto.
790100266
A los editores les gusta
Excelente rendimient
Gran potencial y funciones especiales para overcloc
Estética muy cuidad
Bios sumamente complet
Placa de sonido SupremeFXIII integrad
Si desea opinar acerca de esta artícul
Clickee Aquí
Gran cantidad de núcleos
Opciones totalmente desbloqueadas
Excelente rendimiento
Tanto en juegos como en tareas multihilo
Soporte nativo para memorias 1866MHz
Puede alcanzar facilmente frecuencias superiores a 4
5Ghz
Excelente relación Precio/Rendim
Precio en torno a los 200 euros
Buen comportamiento térmico
El coste total de un equipo es reducido si se eligen bien los componentes
Relación precio/rendimiento excelente
Multiplicador desbloqueado
Es totalmente compatible con placas base AM3
A los editores no les gusta
Posición y forma de los puntos de medición de voltajes.
Gran consumo al hacer overclocking
Rendimiento equivalente a un cuatro núcleos de Intel
A pesar de tener ocho
Y con un TDP notablemente mayor que se refleja en el consumo de energía
Resumen: From the initial testing of the brand new AMD FX-8350 "Vishera", the performance was admirable, especially compared to last year's bit of a troubled start with the AMD FX Bulldozer processors. For many of the Linux computational benchmarks carried out ...
Excellent Price, Improved "Piledriver" Cores, AMD Turbo Core 3.0, Improved latencies compared to FX8150, 4GHz out of the box (4.2GHz with Turbo Core), Unlocked, 5GHz Overclockable
Power consumption and temperatures have been improved but still high
Expectations have been mixed in regards to the new “Piledriver” core processors, mostly because of the hype that surrounded Bulldozer and the consequent results that were not up to par with what most enthusiasts wished. It also did not help that Bulldoz...
¿Le ha sido de ayuda esta crítica?
Premio
-
Publicación: 2012-10-23, Autor: hokiealumnus , crítica de: overclockers.com
I didn't give Bulldozer as bad a review as a lot of people did. Unlike many, I tried to look at Bulldozer as just any other CPU, not the return of the FX of days past, when AMD ruled the roost and Intel was playing catch up. I gave Bulldozer an Overcloc...
The FX-8350 is closer to what the FX-8150 should have been. There, I said it, and I think that pretty much sums up the comparison…so if you stop reading right now, you at least have the right take away. The CPU performs better in almost all facets, ru...
Reasonably priced, Appreciable performance improvements with multicore-optimized software, Compatible with older AMD socket and motherboards
Still lags behind in single-core tests, Uses much more power than comparable Intel chips, which also have on-chip graphics
AMD's new-for-2012 octo-core desktop processor shows improved performance with software that takes full advantage of all cores. It's a good option for upgraders with an earlier AMD FX-based system, but single-core performance and power efficiency still f...
¿Le ha sido de ayuda esta crítica?
(70%)
Publicación: 2012-10-23, Autor: Hilbert , crítica de: guru3d.com
then. I'll keep saying this, personally I would have preferred a faster per core performing AMD quad-core processor rather then an eight-core processor with reduced nice per core performance. However we do have to be clear here, we have been working with...
Good Performance, Decent Overclocker, Improved Efficiency, Easy Upgrade For Existing AMD Owners
Dated Platform, Intel CPUs Still Clearly Faster
Even before AMD officially released its Bulldozer-based FX-Series of desktop processors last year, the company was already talking about the follow-on microarchitecture codenamed “Piledriver”. In fact, in the conclusion of our launch article featuring the...
Eight cores and 5GHz on your desktop computer, Officially supports DDR31866 memory, Better performance than Intel on multithreaded tasks, An FX system has 38 usable PCIE lanes as opposed to the 24 lanes of a Sandy Bridge system, Excellent price/performance ratio, finally competitive with Intel in the $200 CPU range,
Single core performance still lags far behind Intel, Few programs use new FX instructions like fused multiplyadd, so the full performance potential remains untapped
Benchmark tests should always be taken with a grain of salt. It's difficult to try and isolate the performance difference a single component in a computer system makes, especially when it's necessary to compare across different manufacturers and platf...
We are big fans of AMD here at OC3D. Not only did we start with AMD CPUs back in the Thunderbird days, but as people who like technology in all forms it's important that all the major manufacturers have healthy competition. Just as the Pentium III was out...
Publicación: 2012-10-23, Autor: Steven , crítica de: techspot.com
Resumen: About this time last year, AMD's new Bulldozer-based FX series launched to bright-eyed system builders who expected the new architecture to challenge Intel's increasingly comfortable position in the upper-end processor market. Unfortunately, Bulldozer was...
