Is the AMD FX 8350 any good for gaming?

[Dat_PC_gamer]

Hey! I am confused between these two CPU's:
AMD FX 8350
Intel i5 4670k
I am going to have:
8 gb of ddr3 1600 Mhz RAM
AMD R9 290 Graphic card.
Will the cpu or gpu bottleneck?
I don't care about the extra power that the AMD CPU takes. Also, the AMD FX 8350 has more L2 and L3 Cache.
All input is appreciated.

 

[dj1997]

Hey! I am confused between these two CPU's:
AMD FX 8350
Intel i5 4670k
I am going to have:
8 gb of ddr3 1600 Mhz RAM
AMD R9 290 Graphic card.
Will the cpu or gpu bottleneck?
I don't care about the extra power that the AMD CPU takes. Also, the AMD FX 8350 has more L2 and L3 Cache.
All input is appreciated.

the amd cpu uses more power and performs worse I have the 4670k in one of my builds and it performs brilliantly paired with a gtx 770 which if you can afford I would highly recommend also the amd one will likely be a bottleneck for that gpu

 

[thenoobypro]

Yes, the FX 8350 is an excellent CPU. Although it's a bit pricey for what it does. You could get an 8320 for less and get the same performance. And it won't be that big of a bottleneck with that card. You won't notice it. The 6300 is also a good price to performance CPU.

What board are you going to be using?

 

[JOOK-D]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

Yes, the FX 8350 is an excellent CPU. Although it's a bit pricey for what it does. You could get an 8320 for less and get the same performance. And it won't be that big of a bottleneck with that card. You won't notice it. The 6300 is also a good price to performance CPU.

What board are you going to be using?

Well, I am not going to use a pricey bo.ard that's for sure. There is a place in my city where they sell computer hardware for cheap. Those guys give cpu+mobo combos. The combos are really cheap. They're giving me a good gigabyte or asus board with a 4670k for approx $270 and with a fx 8350 for $205 (after currency conversion from indian rupee to us dollar). I live in India. AMD CPU's are as cheap as in the US but intel is much more expensive. AMD products are very cheap here. So price is not a problem for the CPU.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

the amd cpu uses more power and performs worse I have the 4670k in one of my builds and it performs brilliantly paired with a gtx 770 which if you can afford I would highly recommend also the amd one will likely be a bottleneck for that gpu

AMD FX 8350 bottlenecks with R9 290! 8350 is pretty powerful. Are you sure the 8350 will bottleneck with the R9 290?

 

[CooLWoLF]

the amd cpu uses more power and performs worse I have the 4670k in one of my builds and it performs brilliantly paired with a gtx 770 which if you can afford I would highly recommend also the amd one will likely be a bottleneck for that gpu

AMD FX 8350 bottlenecks with R9 290! 8350 is pretty powerful. Are you sure the 8350 will bottleneck with the R9 290?

No, it will not bottleneck. Period.

Either cpu is a great choice.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

the amd cpu uses more power and performs worse I have the 4670k in one of my builds and it performs brilliantly paired with a gtx 770 which if you can afford I would highly recommend also the amd one will likely be a bottleneck for that gpu

AMD FX 8350 bottlenecks with R9 290! 8350 is pretty powerful. Are you sure the 8350 will bottleneck with the R9 290?

No, it will not bottleneck. Period.

Either cpu is a great choice.

Yeah, but which one! Either is great but as I said, which is near-to-perfect for the R9 290. I won't be overclocking(at least not any time soon).

 

[thenoobypro]

Bulldozer architecture is fine, too. There was a previous problem with it in the past where it would cause crashes with Steam games, but this has been fixed. So don't let the architecture limit you.

But, I was going to say, if you're using the 8X series with an MSI G46 or G43 board, don't. Get a different CPU or board. The 8 series has issues with those boards.

 

[JOOK-D]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

Bulldozer architecture is fine, too. There was a previous problem with it in the past where it would cause crashes with Steam games, but this has been fixed. So don't let the architecture limit you.

But, I was going to say, if you're using the 8X series with an MSI G46 or G43 board, don't. Get a different CPU or board. The 8 series has issues with those boards.

Ok. Thanks. I will make sure I don't get that motherboard.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

How much does that processor cost?

 

[JOOK-D]

Bulldozer architecture is fine, too. There was a previous problem with it in the past where it would cause crashes with Steam games, but this has been fixed. So don't let the architecture limit you.

But, I was going to say, if you're using the 8X series with an MSI G46 or G43 board, don't. Get a different CPU or board. The 8 series has issues with those boards.

It's not worth going for bulldozer when they're priced the same as piledriver and piledriver performs much better. It's best to just avoid the x1xx and x2xx series.

And I can assure you the steam issue hasn't been fixed.

 

[thenoobypro]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

 

[thenoobypro]

Bulldozer architecture is fine, too. There was a previous problem with it in the past where it would cause crashes with Steam games, but this has been fixed. So don't let the architecture limit you.

But, I was going to say, if you're using the 8X series with an MSI G46 or G43 board, don't. Get a different CPU or board. The 8 series has issues with those boards.

It's not worth going for bulldozer when they're priced the same as piledriver and piledriver performs much better. It's best to just avoid the x1xx and x2xx series.

And I can assure you the steam issue hasn't been fixed.

Update your BIOS if it hasn't been fixed.

 

[JOOK-D]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

How much does that processor cost?

Around $245 but you save money compared to the 4670k which would need a Z87 board to overclock anyway. So about the same. Between an i5 4670k+Z87 and a Xeon 1230v3 and a B/H series motherboard I'd take the Xeon every time.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

Haha. I was suspecting that it would be a server/workstation cpu. I need a CPU which costs no more than approx $290.

 

[JOOK-D]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

E3's are workstation CPUs. They perform exactly the same as an i7 at the same clockspeed, minus a few features that the huge majority of users dont use. They also come with many instruction sets that are missing from k series intel CPUs.

 

[thenoobypro]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

Haha. I was suspecting that it would be a server/workstation cpu. I need a CPU which costs no more than approx $290.

If you have enough money, go Intel. Get an i7 or a good i5.
But if you're on a budget, go for AMD. They're very nice CPU's for a good price, same with their GPUs.

The current build you have put together will work fine. I'd say, go for Intel if you have the money, if not, stick with what you've got put together there.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

E3's are workstation CPUs. They perform exactly the same as an i7 at the same clockspeed, minus a few features that the huge majority of users dont use. They also come with many instruction sets that are missing from k series intel CPUs.

But I'd be using the CPU mainly for gaming.

 

[CooLWoLF]

Here's the thing. The 8350 is INTENDED to be overclocked. And its so easy on a decent motherboard. A novice could do it with a simple guide. (I can provide a link). You're almost guaranteed to hit 4.5ghz on air. Higher with water cooling. And you don't need a fancy setup either. I hit 4.7ghz with a simple H80i clone (an FX branded cooler from Asetek). With an H100i, you could hit roughly 5ghz.

But with that said, if you're not overclocking, then get the 4670k. Because that is definitely better than a stock 8350.

 

[JOOK-D]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

E3's are workstation CPUs. They perform exactly the same as an i7 at the same clockspeed, minus a few features that the huge majority of users dont use. They also come with many instruction sets that are missing from k series intel CPUs.

But I'd be using the CPU mainly for gaming.

It's marketed as a workstation CPU. It performs exactly the same as an i7 of the same clockspeed, regardless of the task, whether that be gaming or video editing or whatever you want to do.

 

[Dat_PC_gamer]

Here's the thing. The 8350 is INTENDED to be overclocked. And its so easy on a decent motherboard. A novice could do it with a simple guide. (I can provide a link). You're almost guaranteed to hit 4.5ghz on air. Higher with water cooling. And you don't need a fancy setup either. I hit 4.7ghz with a simple H80i clone (an FX branded cooler from Asetek). With an H100i, you could hit roughly 5ghz.

But with that said, if you're not overclocking, then get the 4670k. Because that is definitely better than a stock 8350.

Alright. I had considered the FX 8350 because it has more l1, l2 and l3 cache with higher clock speed.

 

[thenoobypro]

The 4670k would currently be the better choice, however the FX 8350 might perform better in future due to increased multithreading. Here's my draft for the difference between them:

The difference between AMD and intel for gaming.
Firstly, you need to decide what your priorities are, and what you will use the PC for.
Things such as: light gaming, heavy gaming, basic work (e.g. MS Office), heavy work (e.g. video editing, 3d modeling).
For the most part in current games the biggest difference will be made by the selection of the GPU. Get a great GPU + worse CPU rather than worse GPU + great CPU.

The AMD FX CPU's have many cores, which are weaker.
intel i5's have less cores, which are stronger.

The intel's consequently have better performance per core. In older games, the intels perform much better as those games are optimised for good performance with only a few cores (single-threading).
In newer games, the AMD FX's really shine due to the introduction of games using more cores (multi-threading).

The difference comes in depending on what you want to use the PC for. If you're on a tight budget, save some money and go with the AMD and spend the extra money on a better GPU that will give you better performance than any CPU could.

i5: Good for older games (single-threaded), Good for newer games (multi-threaded), Good for general work, great all-round CPU and probably the best around for current games (may change in future, see here: http://www.corsair.com/blog/ps4-xbone-pcgaming/ ).
AMD: Slightly worse for older games (single-threaded), Great for newer games (multi-threaded e.g. BF4, Crysis 3), Good for light/heavy work, extra cores are great for 3d modeling and video editing or rendering, great CPU whilst costing much less than the intel. Even though it's worse in older games it will run them perfectly well and smoothly.

Regardless, both will perform well.
For an i5, I would recommend an i5 3570k or a 4670k. Why? They are king for gaming performance at the moment and since they are the k version they are unlocked and can be overclocked in future for a performance boost.
For an AMD, I would recommend a FX 6300/8320/8350 [Do NOT go with a bulldozer CPU, only piledriver. List here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piledriver_(microarchitecture) <-- That should all be one link, not sure why it splits.]. Why? Great multi-threaded performance for newer games and heavy work, are just fine in older games (not overkill, can deliver smooth frame rates maxed with a good GPU), and are great for productivity with a tame pricetag.

Some non-synthetic benchmarks for AMD FX 83xx vs i5/i7:
Gaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4et7kDGSRfc
Gaming and Streaming: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE
These benchmarks are very controversial, since most other benchmarks show the i5 winning 9 times out of 10. It's interesting though.

In conclusion, budget gaming/work: AMD. Not on a budget gaming/work: i5. The i5 currently delivers better performance but don't get the impression that the AMD is lagging behind. They are great for gaming and work with a really great pricetag, just not currently up there with intel. In newer games though such as BF4 the AMD's have almost caught up in performance for much less money. You will get great, smooth FPS with either.
Either solution will game just fine with a nice GPU, focus mainly on that.

I've looked up other people who were having trouble in deciding between these 2 CPU's and this is the same copy paste answer. My question is, will it bottleneck with the GPU I am going to use(R9 290) or is there any other CPU for around the same price which will be perfectly paired with my GPU.

That's pretty funny, it's my draft haha.
An i5 4670k will not bottleneck your GPU. An FX 8350 may do so in single-threaded (generally older) games, and some newer ones since it's single-core performance is not up to par. But it also seems that games are getting increasigly multithreaded. I'd honestly choose a Xeon 1230v3 (essentially an i7 4770) and get a B or H series motherboard. You get the benefits of intels single-core performance and then you also get hyperthreading for when multithreading takes off.

Nonononono. Do NOT get a Xeon CPU for gaming. Those are workstation server CPUs. That's generally why most Xeon boards have two physical CPUs. They're not meant for gaming, so you won't benefit from them and will get worse performance on games than if you had an i7.

E3's are workstation CPUs. They perform exactly the same as an i7 at the same clockspeed, minus a few features that the huge majority of users dont use. They also come with many instruction sets that are missing from k series intel CPUs.

Show me benchmarks then. I know that server CPUs aren't meant for gaming, so they aren't optimized to perform as well as a gaming CPU. They're based around different architecture and are meant to do number crunching, things of that nature.

It's just like workstation GPUs. They're meant for 3D Modeling and rendering video, so they won't perform as well on games as an actual gaming GPU like the Radeon and R7 and R9 series.