Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 3900XT 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 9 3900XT is 2814 days newer than the cheaper FX-8350.
Advantages of AMD FX-8350
- Up to 38% cheaper than Ryzen 9 3900XT - $133.09 vs $215.7
- Up to 24% better value when playing Battlefield V than Ryzen 9 3900XT - $0.71 vs $0.94 per FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT
- Performs up to 22% better in Battlefield V than FX-8350 - 255 vs 209 FPS
- Consumes up to 16% less energy than AMD FX-8350 - 105 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8350 - 24 vs 8 threads
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
209
81.96078431372548%
Value, €/FPS
€0.71/FPS
100%
Price, €
€147.73
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €147.73 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1618 minutes ago
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
FPS
255
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.94/FPS
75.53191489361703%
Price, €
€239.43
61%
FPS Winner
Buy for €239.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1625 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8350 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Vishera | Codename | Matisse |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
4.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 105 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |