Key Differences
In short — Core i9-9900K 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 Core i9-9900K is 2187 days newer than the cheaper FX-8350.
Advantages of AMD FX-8350
- Up to 54% cheaper than Core i9-9900K - $185.0 vs $405.0
- Up to 48% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-9900K - $1.1 vs $2.1 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-9900K
- Performs up to 15% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-8350 - 193 vs 168 FPS
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than AMD FX-8350 - 95 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8350 - 16 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8350 doesn't have integrated graphics
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for $185 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18387 minutes ago
Buy for $405 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 18388 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8350 | vs | Intel Core i9-9900K |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 19th, 2018 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Coffee Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
4.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.0 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 95 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |