In Atomfall, the Core i5-650 is slightly slower than the FX-4350. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $14 cheaper!
Core i5-650
- Up to 18% cheaper – $68.23 vs $82.71
- Up to 18% cheaper
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall – $0.36 vs $0.43/FPS
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall
- Consumes up to 42% less energy – 73 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 42% less energy
FX-4350
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 188 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
- Is 3 years and 3 months newer – Apr 29, 2013 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 3 years and 3 months newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-650 vs FX-4350: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-650
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
187 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
99%
Price, $
$68.23
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.36/FPS
100%
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Average FPS
188 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
141 FPS
100%
Price, $
$82.71
82%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
84%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-650 vs FX-4350 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-650 vs FX-4350 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-650
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
76%
Turbo Frequency
3.466 GHz
81%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
71%
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-650 Jan 7th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-4350 Apr 29th, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 7th, 2010 | Release Date | Apr 29th, 2013 |
| $176.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1156 | Socket | AM3+ |
73W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1333 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
