Amd Fx 8350 Vs I5 6400
Price now 220$ Games supported 90% Price now 217$ Games supported 87% Comparing FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), compages, sales start time and price. Value for money To get the alphabetize we compare the characteristics of the processors and their price, taking into business relationship the price of other processors. FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base of operations frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, enshroud size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you lot take to consider their test results. Information on FX-8350 and Cadre i5-6400 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (await for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing ane. Annotation that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU ability parameters. Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and Core i5-6400. You'll probably need this information if y'all require some particular engineering. FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks. Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and Cadre i5-6400 are enumerated here. Types, maximum corporeality and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and Core i5-6400. Depending on the motherboards, higher retention frequencies may be supported. General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any. Bachelor interfaces and connections of FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 integrated GPUs. Maximum brandish resolutions supported by FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over dissimilar interfaces. APIs supported by FX-8350 and Core i5-6400 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included. Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and Cadre i5-6400. Diverse benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is ameliorate. This is our combined benchmark operation rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, experience free to speak upwards in comments section, nosotros usually fix problems quickly. Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread criterion, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating bespeak math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics adding. There is besides one separate unmarried-threaded scenario measuring single-core functioning. Criterion coverage: 68% GeekBench 5 Single-Cadre is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate sure real-world tasks with which to accurately mensurate performance. This version uses only a single CPU core. Criterion coverage: 37% GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cantankerous-platform awarding adult in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate sure real-world tasks with which to accurately measure out performance. This version uses all available CPU cores. Benchmark coverage: 37% Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses only one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle. Benchmark coverage: 20% Cinebench Release 10 Multi Cadre is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by xvi in this version. Benchmark coverage: 19% wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates foursquare roots of first 32 meg integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark effect, the faster the processor. Benchmark coverage: 18% Cinebench Release 11.five Multi Cadre is a variant of Cinebench R11.five which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version. Benchmark coverage: 17% Cinebench Release fifteen Multi Core (sometimes chosen Multi-Thread) is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads. Benchmark coverage: 14% Cinebench R11.five is an sometime benchmark past Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Information technology was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Movie theater 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a unmarried thread with ray tracing to return a sleeky room total of crystal spheres and light sources. Benchmark coverage: 14% Cinebench R15 (standing for Release xv) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Picture palace 4D. It was superseded by subsequently versions of Cinebench, which use more than modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Cadre version (sometimes called Unmarried-Thread) just uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources. Criterion coverage: 13% TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded operation tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per 2d. Benchmark coverage: thirteen% x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher scrap rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is notwithstanding measured in frames per 2nd. Benchmark coverage: 12% x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample Hard disk (720p) video. Pass one is a faster variant that produces a constant scrap charge per unit output file. Its upshot is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second. Benchmark coverage: 12% Cryptocurrency mining performance of FX-8350 and Core i5-6400. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Technical City couldn't make up one's mind betwixt AMD FX-8350 and Intel Cadre i5-6400 The differences in performance seem too small-scale. Should yous nevertheless take questions on choice between FX-8350 and Core i5-6400, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer. Practice you call back we are correct or mistaken in our option? Vote past clicking "Like" button nearly your favourite CPU. Nosotros believe that the nearest equivalent to FX-8350 from Intel is Core i7-4770T, which is well-nigh equal in speed and lower by three positions in our rating. Here are some closest Intel rivals to FX-8350: We believe that the nearest equivalent to Cadre i5-6400 from AMD is FX-8320, which is nearly equal in speed and higher past one position in our rating. Hither are some closest AMD rivals to Cadre i5-6400: We picked several like comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this folio. Here you can meet how users rate the processors, as well every bit charge per unit them yourself. Rate AMD FX-8350 on a calibration of 1 to v: Rate Intel Core i5-6400 on a scale of i to 5: Here you can enquire a question about FX-8350 or Core i5-6400, hold or disagree with our judgements, or written report an error or mismatch. Graphics settings Screen resolution FPSAMD FX-8350 vs Intel Core i5-6400
General info
Place in operation rating 1095 1165 Value for money 1.84 three.77 Market segment Desktop processor Desktop processor Serial AMD FX-Series (Desktop) Intel Core i5 Architecture codename Vishera (2012−2015) Skylake (2015−2016) Release appointment 23 October 2012 (ix years ago) v Baronial 2015 (7 years ago) Launch cost (MSRP) no data $187 Current price $220 $217 (1.2x MSRP) Technical specs
Physical cores viii (Octa-Cadre) four (Quad-Cadre) Threads 8 four Base clock speed 4 GHz ii.7 GHz Boost clock speed 4.ii GHz 3.3 GHz L1 cache no data 64K (per core) L2 cache 8192 KB 256K (per core) L3 cache no data six MB (shared) Chip lithography 32 nm xiv nm Dice size 315 mm2 177 mm2 Maximum core temperature 61 °C 71 °C Maximum case temperature (TCase) no data 72 °C Number of transistors 1,200 million no information 64 bit support + + Windows 11 compatibility - - Unlocked multiplier i - P0 Vcore voltage Min: 1.2 Five - Max: 1.iv Five no data Compatibility
Number of CPUs in a configuration ane 1 Socket AM3+ FCLGA1151 Thermal design power (TDP) 125 Watt 65 Watt Technologies and extensions
Instruction set extensions MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-5, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Cadre, HT3.i Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.ii, Intel® AVX2 AES-NI + + FMA + no data AVX + + vPro no data + Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) no data + Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) no data + Turbo Boost Technology no data 2.0 Hyper-Threading Engineering science no data - TSX no data - TSX no data + Idle States no data + Thermal Monitoring no data + SIPP no data - Security technologies
TXT no data - EDB no information + Secure Central no information + MPX no data + Identity Protection no information + SGX no data Yes with Intel® ME OS Guard no data + Virtualization technologies
AMD-Five + + VT-d no data + VT-ten no data + EPT no data + Memory specs
Supported memory types DDR3 DDR3, DDR4 Maximum retentivity size no information 64 GB Max retention channels no data two Maximum memory bandwidth no data 34.one GB/s ECC retentiveness support no information - Graphics specifications
Integrated graphics card no data Intel HD Graphics 530 Max video memory no data 64 GB Quick Sync Video no data + Clear Video no data + Clear Video HD no data + Graphics max frequency no information 950 MHz InTru 3D no information + Graphics interfaces
Number of displays supported no data 3 eDP no data + DisplayPort no data + HDMI no data + DVI no data + Graphics image quality
4K resolution support no information + Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 no data 4096x2304@24Hz Max resolution over eDP no data 4096x2304@60Hz Max resolution over DisplayPort no data 4096x2304@60Hz Max resolution over VGA no data N/A Graphics API support
DirectX no data 12 OpenGL no data iv.5 Peripherals
PCIe version northward/a iii.0 PCI Express lanes no data 16 Criterion performance
Overall score
Mining hashrates
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) no data 37 Mh/south Gaming functioning
Advantages and disadvantages
Operation rating 5.89 5.37 Novelty 23 Oct 2012 five August 2015 Boost clock speed 4200 3300 Base clock speed 4000 2700 Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm Thermal design ability (TDP) 125 Watt 65 Watt
Bandage your vote
Competitors of FX-8350 past Intel
Competitors of Core i5-6400 by AMD
Similar processor comparisons
User rating
Questions and comments
Amd Fx 8350 Vs I5 6400,
Source: https://technical.city/en/cpu/FX-8350-vs-Core-i5-6400
Posted by: floydpluence.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Amd Fx 8350 Vs I5 6400"
Post a Comment