Why is the Intel i7 4770k better than AMD FX8350?

[MrAlaweey98]

I may sound like a noob asking this but why is the Intel i7 4770k better than AMD FX8350. If we compare the two AMD FX8350 has 4 more cores and runs at a higher clock speed. I want to know why people buy the i7 4770k when it has less performance.

 

[rgd1101]

because more cores doesn't mean more performance.
you can google 4770k vs fx 8350

 

[bignastyid]

The i7 can perform more instructions per clock.

 

[notherdude]

Performance is a lot more than mhz and number of cores. It's all about the efficiency of the architecture http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-vs-AMD-FX-8350 Read the details at the bottom.

But that said the AMD chip has a lot of bang for the buck.

 

[mouse24]

Core count isn't everything. The FX8350 uses sudo cores that simply aren't as fully fledged. The i7 has higher performance per core than the FX8350. Though in heavily multithreaded apps the FX8350 can get close to the i7.

Theres a reason its nearly a hundred dollars cheaper.

 

[alex53]

I may sound like a noob asking this but why is the Intel i7 4770k better than AMD FX8350. If we compare the two AMD FX8350 has 4 more cores and runs at a higher clock speed. I want to know why people buy the i7 4770k when it has less performance.

 

[alex53]

Because AMD FX 8350 is two hundred fifty dollars cheaper

 

[WoodenSaucer]

It's the same type of scenario as the PlayStation 4 vs the PlayStation 3. Nobody questions that the PS4 is way more powerful than the PS3, yet its clock speed is about half that of the PS3. Obviously there is more at stake than Gigahertz. With the 4770k's hyperthreading, it's basically the same as having 8 cores, and it runs much more efficiently than the FX8350. The benchmarks don't lie.

 

[Jrlurl]

It's the same type of scenario as the PlayStation 4 vs the PlayStation 3. Nobody questions that the PS4 is way more powerful than the PS3, yet its clock speed is about half that of the PS3. Obviously there is more at stake than Gigahertz. With the 4770k's hyperthreading, it's basically the same as having 8 cores, and it runs much more efficiently than the FX8350. The benchmarks don't lie.

Somewhat true, but hyper threading is nowhere near the same thing as having 8 physical cores

 

[Mac266]

Somewhat true, but hyper threading is nowhere near the same thing as having 8 physical cores

Also true, except that the 8350 doesn't really have 8 true cores.

 

[bmacsys]

Core count isn't everything. The FX8350 uses sudo cores that simply aren't as fully fledged. The i7 has higher performance per core than the FX8350. Though in heavily multithreaded apps the FX8350 can get close to the i7.

Theres a reason its nearly a hundred dollars cheaper.

You mean "pseudo"? Or are we talking "sudo" as in Linux or Unix?

 

[bmacsys]

Somewhat true, but hyper threading is nowhere near the same thing as having 8 physical cores

Also true, except that the 8350 doesn't really have 8 true cores.

It is a true eight core cpu measured by any technical standard. There are eight integer cores that share resources.

 

[bmacsys]

It's the same type of scenario as the PlayStation 4 vs the PlayStation 3. Nobody questions that the PS4 is way more powerful than the PS3, yet its clock speed is about half that of the PS3. Obviously there is more at stake than Gigahertz. With the 4770k's hyperthreading, it's basically the same as having 8 cores, and it runs much more efficiently than the FX8350. The benchmarks don't lie.

Somewhat true, but hyper threading is nowhere near the same thing as having 8 physical cores

In some compute workloads the 8350 will come out on top. Not any compute workloads the average home user will ever encounter but they do exist. In poorly threaded workloads or lightly threaded ones the i7 will beat the 8350 no question.

 

[bmacsys]

But that said the AMD chip has a lot of bang for the buck.

This.................

 

[mouse24]

Core count isn't everything. The FX8350 uses sudo cores that simply aren't as fully fledged. The i7 has higher performance per core than the FX8350. Though in heavily multithreaded apps the FX8350 can get close to the i7.

Theres a reason its nearly a hundred dollars cheaper.

You mean "pseudo"? Or are we talking "sudo" as in Linux or Unix?

I meant pseudo. But I would like to say that they are true cores but not in the sense of being completely separated from each other.

 

[Mac266]

Somewhat true, but hyper threading is nowhere near the same thing as having 8 physical cores

Also true, except that the 8350 doesn't really have 8 true cores.

It is a true eight core cpu measured by any technical standard. There are eight integer cores that share resources.

Integer cores yes. Floating point Cores no.

Just to be comparative:

An AMD core has one integer unit (not sure what it's meant to be called) and shares a Floating point unit in a module.
An Intel core has one integer unit and one floating point unit.