In Atomfall, the FX-4350 is slower than the Core i9-14900. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $487 cheaper!
FX-4350
- Up to 85% cheaper – $82.71 vs $569.99
- Up to 85% cheaper
- Up to 82% better value in Atomfall – $0.43 vs $2.33/FPS
- Up to 82% better value in Atomfall
Core i9-14900
- Up to 29% faster in Atomfall – 244 vs 189 FPS
- Up to 29% faster in Atomfall
- Is 10 years and 8 months newer – Jan 08, 2024 vs Apr 29, 2013
- Is 10 years and 8 months newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
FX-4350 vs Core i9-14900: Comparison of performance and price
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Average FPS
189 FPS
77%
Min 1% FPS
142 FPS
78%
Price, $
$82.71
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
100%
Core i9-14900
Jan 8th, 2024
Average FPS
244 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
183 FPS
100%
Price, $
$569.99
14%
Value, $/FPS
$2.33/FPS
18%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-4350 vs Core i9-14900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-4350 vs Core i9-14900 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-4350
Apr 29th, 2013
Cores
4-core
17%
L3 Cache
8 MB
22%
Base Frequency
4.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
74%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
33%
Core i9-14900
Jan 8th, 2024
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2 GHz
48%
Turbo Frequency
5.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-4350 Apr 29th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-14900 Jan 8th, 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Apr 29th, 2013 | Released | Jan 8th, 2024 |
| – | MSRP | $549.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1700 |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4), 5600 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 770 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
