How long before Intel's performance is as bad as this motherfucking piece of shit?
>>70965469FX 8350 TRADES BLOWS WITH 3570K AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEwwX7VEhDk
>>70965538That's pretty based, the 3570K cost more than the 8350 and if you wanted to change the multiplier because intel are a bunch of semetic assholes, you'd need to but a Z77 motherboard.
At least it's not a botnet
>>70966152One of these days when everything's pozzed, FX CPUs will be all that's left becuse it's the most powerful non botnet x86 chip we can get that isn't made by IBM and expensive.
>>70966703Are all FX cpu's botnet free from AMD's PSP?
>>70966988Yes. From excavator APUs all the way up to the 9590.
>>70965538So basically, after a fuckload of security patches for Intel's CPUs (that were totally not development shortcuts to get better performance at the expense of security, we swear guise!), even fucking Bulldozer is on par with the 3570K.Intel leveraged an entire decade of "dominance" over having insecure CPUs that weren't secure, and they likely knew this too. Scummiest company in the medium. At least Nvidia dominates the GPU space while being competent, even if evil. Intel is just a clusterfuck.
>>70967019Okay that's nice to hear
I'm not a gaymer so my FX4300 is still enough for me.
I still have an fx8350 laying around doing nothingseems I might have a use for it again
>>70967557>FX4300Shit Anon, if you put an 8350 in you'd be good for even longer if your needs arent much greater than shitposting and watching videos.
>>70965469Isn't it already at that point. All their shortcuts ended up being security risks
>>70969670We may be at this point, you've got guys out here suggesting disabling fucking hyperthreading just to stay secure, that's your performance advantage over an old Bulldozer/Piledriver CPU right there.
>>70965469>tfw a cut down server chip is dominating an expensive 3570k of old
I'd imagine that Sandy vag / Ivy bridge are probably already there, with all patches applied, etc.. That isn't including disabling HT, which can reportedly result in a loss of performance up to around 40%. I bet the FX 8350 outperforms the 2600K at stock clocks at this point.
>>70970975The 8350 has always outperformed the 2600k at stock clocks at least on cinebench R15, its single core is just ass, a biased benchmark like cpuz and aida64 show it way ahead for some reason