Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Ryzen 9 5950X outperforms the cheaper FX-8350 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Ryzen 9 5950X is 2935 days newer than the cheaper FX-8350.
Advantages of FX-8350
- Up to 9% cheaper than Ryzen 9 5950X - €285.00 vs €314.00
Advantages of Ryzen 9 5950X
- Performs up to 27% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than FX-8350 - 146 vs 115 FPS
- Up to 13% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than FX-8350 - €2.15 vs €2.48 per 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 - 32 vs 8 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for €285 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7382 minutes ago
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
FPS
146
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.15/FPS
100%
Price, €
€314
90%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €314 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7382 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
FX-8350 | vs | Ryzen 9 5950X |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Nov 5th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Vishera | Codename | Vermeer |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
4.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 105 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |