AMD FX-4350 Review
| Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
|---|---|---|
| Target | mid-range | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Socket Compatibility | AM3+ | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Integrated Graphics | None | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Cooler Included | No | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overclock Potential | 4.5 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Year | 2012 Model | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Price | 440.3 USD | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Number of Cores | 4 Cores | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Number of Threads | 4 Threads | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Core Frequency | 4.2 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Boost Frequency | 4.3 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Max Stable Overclock | 4.5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Power Consumption | 125 W | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Manufacturing Process | 32 nm | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Maximum Supported Memory | 32 GB | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Price-Value Score | 21.3 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Speed Score | 53 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Productivity Score | 31 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Gaming Score | 71 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1080p Bottleneck | 54.2 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1440p Bottleneck | 27.1 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 4K Bottleneck | 13.6 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overall Score | 29/100 | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
Introducing the FX-4350! This Desktop processor is part of AMD's high-performance mid-range range. Released in 2012, it features 4 cores and 4 threads. It has a base clock speed of 4.2GHz, can boost up to 4.3GHz, and has a power rating of 125W, making it a perfect fit for your gaming rig. The FX-4350 is based on the robust Vishera 32nm architecture and is part of the acclaimed FX series.
Forget about low single-core performance being a weakness for AMD! With the 4.3GHz turbo boost and some sweet IPC improvements, the FX-4350 is finally competitive on the single-core front. Time to fry some noobs!
AMD just unleashed its Piledriver architecture, raising the stakes in the high-stakes battle for desktop PC dominance against Intel. This new lineup of chips pushes core counts and raw power to crazy high levels, threatening Intel's reign for the first time in a decade. Buckle up, it's about to get intense!
Introducing the FX-4350, the high-performance counterpart to the award-winning FX-4320. Both are built on the same 32nm Piledriver platform, but the FX-4350 cranks the power up to a toasty 125W for those extra cores and threads. We're expecting big things from this one, just like its lower-powered sibling! 'sChoiceHype
The FX-4350 is the more expensive version of the FX-4320, and it shows with its higher base and boost clock speeds: 4.2 GHz and 4.3 GHz, respectively. That's a nice boost in speed, but the real game changer is the higher power delivery (PPT). This lets the motherboard pump more juice (up to 142W) to the FX-4350 compared to the FX-4320's limit of 95W. This extra power allows the FX-4350 to crank up the boost clocks even more aggressively, on both single and multiple cores. That means the performance gap between these two CPUs might be bigger than what the specs on paper suggest.
Alright, listen up. When it comes to pure gaming performance, Intel still holds the crown. If squeezing out every last frame per second is your top priority, then a Intel CPU might be the better choice. But here's the thing: that advantage shrinks at higher resolutions or if you pair the CPU with a less powerful graphics card. mattersToo
For gamers on a budget who aren't afraid of a little overclocking and have decent cooling, the FX-4320 is a solid option. You can get pretty much the same performance as the FX-4350 (especially for gaming) by overclocking it a bit. Plus, it's cheaper! This is why we gave the FX-4320 an Editor's Choice award.
Don't let the 4 cores fool you, the AMD FX-4350 is a surprisingly capable processor! It held its own and felt snappy in our tests. While it fell behind on heavily threaded tasks due to the lower core count, it actually beat some pricier siblings in lightly threaded tasks thanks to its high clock speeds.
The AMD FX-4350 is a decent performing chip for $440.3. The main competitor at this price point is the Core i5-3570, a 4-core unlocked processor with integrated graphics, which costs $231.
If you don't care too much about overclocking and max boost speeds, then the AMD FX-4320 is a good option for $410.15. It also has 4 cores and 4 threads, but with slightly lower clock speeds (4GHz base and 4.2GHz boost).
The FX-4350 boosts up to the advertised 4.3 GHz, and with AMD's software you can push one core even higher to 4.3+0.1 GHz. But don't expect much beyond that without a serious cooler upgrade and manual voltage tweaks.
Which GPU to Pick for AMD FX-4350
Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the AMD FX-4350.
| Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.4 | 73.6 FPS
|
88 FPS
|
61.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 8.1 | 135.1 FPS
|
161.6 FPS
|
110.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 3.7 | 73.1 FPS
|
87.5 FPS
|
61 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 6 | 148.7 FPS
|
177.8 FPS
|
121.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 6.1 | 163.6 FPS
|
195.5 FPS
|
133.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 15 | 132.9 FPS
|
161.8 FPS
|
121.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 3.1 | 63.7 FPS
|
76.3 FPS
|
55.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 4.1 | 73.1 FPS
|
88.5 FPS
|
64.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.9 | 81.7 FPS
|
98.3 FPS
|
71.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 5 | 118.8 FPS
|
141 FPS
|
104.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 5.3 | 150.9 FPS
|
183.6 FPS
|
137.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 7.6 | 157 FPS
|
191.2 FPS
|
143.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 4.7 | 169.1 FPS
|
206 FPS
|
154.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 8.8 | 181.2 FPS
|
220.7 FPS
|
165.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 9.6 | 15.5 FPS
|
16.3 FPS
|
11.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 13.7 | 20.4 FPS
|
23.7 FPS
|
15.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 11.9 | 21 FPS
|
24.2 FPS
|
16.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 27.9 | 53.8 FPS
|
61.8 FPS
|
45.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 10.8 | 13.8 FPS
|
13.9 FPS
|
10 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 27.7 | 36.1 FPS
|
41 FPS
|
29.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 9.6 | 15.6 FPS
|
16.8 FPS
|
12 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 9.5 | 20.9 FPS
|
24 FPS
|
16.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 9.8 | 23.4 FPS
|
26.9 FPS
|
19 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 10.4 | 31.6 FPS
|
36.5 FPS
|
24.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 12.7 | 33.8 FPS
|
40 FPS
|
28.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 15.6 | 35.2 FPS
|
41.7 FPS
|
29.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 15.9 | 40.9 FPS
|
49.6 FPS
|
35.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 17.4 | 37.2 FPS
|
44.3 FPS
|
31.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 10 | 15.9 FPS
|
17.9 FPS
|
12.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 9.9 | 20.1 FPS
|
23 FPS
|
15.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 10.1 | 32.7 FPS
|
36.9 FPS
|
26.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 14.2 | 38.6 FPS
|
44.2 FPS
|
30.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 14.4 | 45 FPS
|
52.2 FPS
|
36.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 19.3 | 51.8 FPS
|
59.5 FPS
|
41.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 9.8 | 14.3 FPS
|
16.2 FPS
|
11.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 6.4 | 27.8 FPS
|
32.3 FPS
|
22.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 12.6 | 31.8 FPS
|
37.3 FPS
|
26.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 7.9 | 50.3 FPS
|
59.4 FPS
|
41.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 9.3 | 53.7 FPS
|
63.5 FPS
|
44 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 7.3 | 10.8 FPS
|
12.2 FPS
|
8.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 41 | 73.2 FPS
|
88.8 FPS
|
64.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 18.1 | 66.3 FPS
|
79 FPS
|
57.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 7 | 11.3 FPS
|
12.9 FPS
|
8.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 5.1 | 38.8 FPS
|
43.8 FPS
|
29.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 4.9 | 34.8 FPS
|
39.4 FPS
|
26.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 6.1 | 16.2 FPS
|
18.3 FPS
|
12.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 5 | 55.8 FPS
|
65.4 FPS
|
45.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 5.4 | 31.2 FPS
|
36 FPS
|
24.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 5.9 | 59.2 FPS
|
70 FPS
|
48.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 6.2 | 64.6 FPS
|
76.3 FPS
|
53 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 6.1 | 37.8 FPS
|
42.7 FPS
|
28.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 6.5 | 42.6 FPS
|
48.2 FPS
|
32.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 9.7 | 17.5 FPS
|
20 FPS
|
13.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 8.2 | 20.6 FPS
|
23.7 FPS
|
16.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 7.2 | 35.1 FPS
|
39.9 FPS
|
27.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 5.1 | 33.3 FPS
|
38 FPS
|
26.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 8.1 | 49 FPS
|
56.5 FPS
|
39 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 7.7 | 53.2 FPS
|
62 FPS
|
43 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 8.7 | 57.5 FPS
|
66.9 FPS
|
46.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 11.2 | 67.6 FPS
|
81.8 FPS
|
57.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 5 | 29.8 FPS
|
34.4 FPS
|
23.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 4.1 | 39.1 FPS
|
45.4 FPS
|
31.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 4.9 | 44.9 FPS
|
52.3 FPS
|
36.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 4.8 | 47.7 FPS
|
55.6 FPS
|
38.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 5.5 | 50.6 FPS
|
59 FPS
|
40.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 6.2 | 56.7 FPS
|
63.2 FPS
|
43.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 6.6 | 60.3 FPS
|
68.7 FPS
|
48.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 7.8 | 63.7 FPS
|
73.8 FPS
|
52.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 7.4 | 67.2 FPS
|
79 FPS
|
55.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 9.7 | 72.2 FPS
|
85.8 FPS
|
60.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 9.2 | 76.3 FPS
|
91.7 FPS
|
64.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 15.4 | 84.1 FPS
|
102.1 FPS
|
72.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 28.9 | 86.4 FPS
|
104.8 FPS
|
74.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 10.5 | 66.3 FPS
|
78.4 FPS
|
54.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 5.5 | 69.1 FPS
|
82.2 FPS
|
57.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 5.8 | 83.1 FPS
|
98.8 FPS
|
67.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 5.9 | 98.7 FPS
|
116.6 FPS
|
81 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 5.2 | 124.6 FPS
|
147.2 FPS
|
102.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 7.6 | 132.3 FPS
|
156.3 FPS
|
108.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 4.8 | 52.1 FPS
|
60.2 FPS
|
42.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 5.2 | 63.3 FPS
|
74.5 FPS
|
53.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.2 | 77.1 FPS
|
93 FPS
|
67 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5.3 | 94.1 FPS
|
110.6 FPS
|
78.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 5.7 | 105.5 FPS
|
125 FPS
|
90 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 5.7 | 123 FPS
|
144.5 FPS
|
102.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 6.5 | 123 FPS
|
147.4 FPS
|
108.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 10.6 | 141.2 FPS
|
165.8 FPS
|
117.2 FPS
|
Intel Vs AMD: Which CPU is Best?
Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?
Impact of RAM Size and Speed on Gaming Benchmarks
Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.
Who Is Lilith and What Terrifies Us About This Diablo Demon?
Jul 24, 2023 No evil entity is more scary than Lilith herself, shrouded in darkness.
Why You Should Always Buy a Mid-to-High-Range Gaming PC?
Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.
Should you buy a Pre-Built PC or a Custom PC?
Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.
How to use CPUAgent To Find The Right CPU
Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.
RTX 3070 with 10600k vs 3700x Bottleneck Comparison
Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?
10600K vs 3600X: Battle of the mid-range CPUs
May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.
10700K vs 3700X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.
10900K vs 3900X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.
2500K vs 3570K vs 4670K vs 6600K vs 7600K vs 8600K vs 9600K vs 10600K: Should you consider upgrading?
May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.