fx8370 and i5 6400.

[gonf]

just to clear things first. I'm not building a new computer. at least not yet. and i'm not trying to start a war here.

I came across with http://wccftech.com/fx-8370-i5-6400-gaming-comparison/ when i was reading on AMD news. From what i've been understand for years. the i5 perform better/faster than the FX (20-40%?) and that should be fact. whats with this fx8370 running as fast as the i5 at 2560×1440 using the highest preset available? is this Benchmarks even real?

 

[Supernova1138]

The i5 6400 is clocked rather low, the base clockrate is only 2.7GHz, and that can certainly hurt it if all cores are loaded and it can't Turbo Boost very high. The FX 8370 is also helped by the fact that most of the games on that benchmark list either are entirely GPU bound like Rise of the Tomb Raider or Shadow of Mordor, or use the Frostbite engine (Battlefield 4 and Star Wars Battlefront), which is one of the very few game engines that actually scales well beyond 4 cores, which does compensate for AMD's rather poor per-core performance.

 

[dudeman509]

Higher resolution tends to move the bottleneck to the GPU rather than the CPU.

The games that utilize >4 cores are the ones you're seeing with great performance on the FX. Hopefully this is a trend that continues in game coding.

 

[gonf]

i think the 2nd part they show the i5 over clock to 4.6 and the fx8370 clock to 4.8.
but still. i would expect to be more one sided giving the fx8370 is only an better OC fx8350 (5 years old cpu)

 

[Ecky]

The i5 is faster when it matters, and they're the same when it doesn't.

 

[gonf]

that is what i though it should be. but it not showing that on the Benchmarks.