Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms the cheaper FX-8350 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8350 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 1752 days newer than the cheaper FX-8350.
Advantages of AMD FX-8350
- Up to 49% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - CA$182.45 vs CA$360.9
- Up to 48% better value when playing World of Tanks than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - CA$0.36 vs CA$0.69 per FPS
- Consumes up to 31% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 125 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 4% better in World of Tanks than FX-8350 - 526 vs 505 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8350 - 24 vs 8 threads
World of Tanks
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
505
96%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.36/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$182.45
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$182.45 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10302 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
526
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.69/FPS
52%
Price, CA$
CA$360.9
50%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$360.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10306 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8350 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Vishera | Codename | Whitehaven |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
4.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 180 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |