Crysis 3 Benchmarks | AMD FX 8350 vs Intel i7 3770k - Both Overclocked

Crysis 3 is here. We put the AMD FX 8350 up against the Intel i7 3770k. We also decided to test Far Cry 3. Check out the video for the results.

System specs:

AMD FX 8350

  • Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard
  • Corsair H80
  • ASUS 7970 Direct CU II @ 1125MHz
  • Kingston 120GB HyperX 3K
  • 16GB Kingston Beast Memory @ 2133MHz
  • Seasonic 850W PSU
Intel i7 3770k
  • ASUS P8Z77-V Pro Motherboard
  • Corsair H100
  • Asus 7970 Direct CU II @ 1125MHz
  • Kingston 120GB HyperX 3K
  • 16GB Kingston Beast Memory @ 2133MHz
  • Seasonic 850W PSU
All games tested at maximum settings first then tested again without any filters (MSAA, FXAA, AA, AF, ETC.). Benchmarks

AMD 8350 - 7970

Crysis 3 - Stock Clock
  • 1080p - Max - 20.00
  • 1080p - No Filters - 32.20
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 35.68
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 54.20
  • 1440p - Max - 13.48
  • 1440p - No filters - 21.96
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 22.88
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 39.04
Crysis 3 - CPU @ 4.6GHz
  • 1080p - Max - 20.00 (identical result, but separate bench)
  • 1080p - No Filters - 32.36
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 36.04
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 56.76
  • 1440p - Max - 13.28
  • 1440p - No Filters - 22.12
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 23.52
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 39.52
Far Cry 3 - Stock Clock
  • 1080p - Max - 34.28
  • 1080p - No Filters - 47.92
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 45.92
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 47.20
  • 1440p - Max - 24.32
  • 1440p - No Filters - 41.92
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 40.80
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 46.56
Far Cry 3 - CPU @ 4.6GHz
  • 1080p - Max - 36.44
  • 1080p - No Filters - 55.24
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 53.12
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 56.40
  • 1440p - Max - 25.52 
  • 1440p - No Filters - 44.20
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 42.08
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 59.24

Intel i7 3770k

Crysis 3 - Stock Clock (No Crossfire for Stock Clock)
  • 1080p - Max - 18.72
  • 1080p - No Filters - 29.80
  • 1440p - Max - 11.16
  • 1440 - No Filters - 18.32
Crysis 3 - CPU @ 4.5GHz
  • 1080p - Max - 21.08
  • 1080p - No Filters - 34.92
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 36.72
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 59.64
  • 1440p - Max - 13.68
  • 1440p - No filters - 23.56
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 23.52
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 40.48
Far Cry 3 - CPU @ 4.5GHz
  • 1080p - Max - 36.20
  • 1080p - No Filters - 59.72
  • 1080p - Crossfire - Max - 76.68
  • 1080p - Crossfire - No Filters - 81.56
  • 1440p - Max - 24.68
  • 1440p - No Filters - 44.52
  • 1440p - Crossfire - Max - 44.12
  • 1440p - Crossfire - No Filters - 64.92

posted 3 years 7 months ago

This was pretty surprising! Getting one of the FX piledrivers now 

posted 3 years 7 months ago


posted 3 years 7 months ago

if amd could lower ther overhead when paired with an intel the numbers would be pretty much identical. 

so yeah bang for buck is pretty much back with amd for this 1 part. im still intel all the way as i want that little extra, if the price is reasonable (under £250) 

typicaly i will build a system around a £250 cpu regardless of manufactuer and which ever gives me the most perfomance at that price willl get my money. but if your on a budget and can only afford £150 for the cpu then amd.

what i laugh at is guys who say amd is cheaper then buy a motherboard that costs more than there cpu. you cant claim its a budget gaming pc when your paying x2 the money for a part that has very little bearing on the cpu's perfomance. yes it will have some but not a huge amount. espaecially when you compare it to asrocks boards that cost less than £100.

if your gonna buy a cpu because you want more bang for your buck then spend the rest of your money wisely 2...


posted 3 years 7 months ago

i am glad i bought fx 8350 not that worse of a cpu 

as much as people say it is

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Well, sure makes you think...

Over here 3570K is ~200€, 3770K is ~290€ and 8350 is ~175€.

I´d probably go with the FX for next build.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I hope we get to see these same bechmarks with a Nvidia GPU

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I almost purchased a GTX 680 yesterday... but this 7970 is so fast.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Would it be possible in the review (if its not already done) to show some Open CL performance results when using it to render something VS say a High end Processor or using CUDA ?

e.g. using Photoshop or Sony Vegas to render some pictures or a small video clip with a bunch of filters/editing ?

posted 3 years 7 months ago

with blender cycles opencl rendering on amd devices is almost 3 times slower than cuda on nvidia

I dont know how optimized either renderer is but the speed difference is quite big for that app.

i briefly looked at octane renderer on my xps laptop and the speed was amazing, considering how cut down the amount of cuda cores (96 of em) are in my gt 525m, sadly no opencl support and no current native support of cinema4d (you need to export scenes through a plugin and then render within the standalone product).

One programme you could possibly do a fair comparison with would be http://www.indigorenderer.com/indigo3 as it supports both and the fact that it is a paid product targeting both ati and nvidia means they are incentivised to maximise performance for both.. i could see that as being an awesome addition to a benchtest suite.

I looked into opencl vs cuda for a while and decided gaming was a more important factor to me.. hence cheap and cheerful ati card with the most bang for buck.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I bought a 4GB EVGa GTX 680 FTW+. The cards are practically identical in performance, but the 680 costs more. I could have gotten xFire 7950s for just a little more money.... I regret it, but my 680 still kicks ass ;)

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Agreed. I feel the need with AMD cards to have a seperate Nvidia card just for Physx games and use it as a dedicated. With 680, you don't need to worry about that.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

My GTX 650 is chugging along, driving two displays at 1920x1200 (fine for my eyes). My limiting factor for gaming continues to be network latency, not the hardware inside my demarc. Let's get the community involved and test that! (Verizon v. ATT v. ComCast by Geographic Location)

posted 3 years 7 months ago

wait 7 secs you damn neckbeards!!!

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Yea, i agree. The results are so close might aswell save $100+ and get the AMD.

UNLESS OF COURSE you're only going to be playing Far-Cry 3 @ 1080p with dualASUS 7970s,.... with filters.

Come on guys (reffering to all the neckbeards), save some money and throw it at gpus not cpus, they're so close...

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I am so happy i got an 8350 a week or 2 after launch. I was really hoping that it would be equal to a i5 but this is more than i hope at the time. If i was rendering etc, i would still grab an i7

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I am still running an i7 930 (the X58 HT 4 core) because I am still very on  the fence about CPU upgrades. My chip is still very very good for games and I am so sure that once the PS4 is out that the 8core AMD cpu's will come into there own and thrash Intel.

Better question is how long am I willing to wait to see as multi plat games are more than a year away.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

jesus... CRYSIS HAS RETURNED!!!!! we can once again ask "can it run crysis?" without shame!!!!

posted 3 years 7 months ago

lol AMD rule for gaming..

Thats why i bought an AMD FX8350.

saw a movie where they put a FX6100 against the 3770k , with the same system specs, it had the same scores on fps in battlefield3 at the same spots in the game..

The only diffrence is the price in netherlands the 6100 was about 95 euro, and the 3770k about 300 euro :D

Why are all those stupid benchmarks sites allways put the 3770k ahead to the FX8350, Logan proofed, that the difrence arent that big as most of the benchmark sites will do us believe...

i realy like  the thing logan is doing for us.

i wasallways a intel fangirl realy.. but afther seen all those videos, i went for the first time a amd fx8350, and damm, the fx8350 is 175 euro and the i7 3770k is 300 euro.. and then i dont talk about the mainboards it self.

That the intel scores a bit better in crosfire, that maybe comes cause the intel 3770k fully support pcie-x 3.0.. but in my eyes its totaly not worh the money :D

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I really want to see how these perform on Starcraft II... It seems to me that game can get a lot more CPU intensive than Crysis or Far Cry.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

where is this auto button you spoke of?


posted 3 years 7 months ago

in the asus ai suite.  or in the bios.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Going to build a computer with a FX 8320 tomorrow! I have a 7870 coming also (same exact HIS IceQ HD 7870 that logan had). Gonna compare mine to his :)

Reason why I got an FX 8320 over an FX 8350 is because the FX 8320 is the same CPU just clocked lower than the FX 8350. I know someone who had an FX 8320 and 8350 to compare, and there was no difference (both OC'd to 5.03ghz). Although the FX 8320 was about 3 degrees hotter.

Still pretty awesome how good the AMD chips are getting closer to the performance of I7's!


posted 3 years 7 months ago

there not the same mate. the 8320 is binned lower so may not oc as well as the 8350.

its identical in acritecture but its binned for theremals and then lower clocked to bring it in line with 125w.

so unless you get a particularly good sample then its likely you wont get to 4.5 with the same thermals/voltage as the 8350.

i would spend the 20 or so more to get lower running temps. easier overclocking at lower voltages.

seriously you can cut only so many corners befor you get less for the money. if needs be buy a cheaper motherboard to enable you to get the better cpu... also dont bother getting faster than 1866 as the amd cpu's handle that nativley and faster speeds wont actually turn into more perfomance in anything other than benchmarks or yourusing an apu. so buy 1866 with the lowest latencies you can. more efficent is better than raw speed 1s you get over the native speed the cpu can handle.

i hope logan reads this and decides to test my hypothisis... i think he will be suprised at the results.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Hey Logan, I would like to see stock clock vs overclock in future videos. Some people overclock and some don't. And actually it is very surprising how overclocking brings only a minimal boost in performance in a lot of games. It is just something I think would make Tek Syndiacte's benchmark videos even more informative :)

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Be interesting to see some numbas with virtu mvp 2.0 enabled in a future video.


posted 3 years 7 months ago

I like performance I'm not a fanboy for intel or amd but with the way it has been where 5 fps cost $100 im goin amd and spending that $100 on a better video card.
posted 3 years 7 months ago


posted 3 years 7 months ago

I just realised this shows how irrelivant pci-e 3.0 is as well.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

yes pci-e 3.0 is totaly useless at the moment, there are no games or cards thats using the full bandwide on pci-e 2.0...

its just intels marketing bullshit...

in the midrange system, when we talk about gaming, AMD rules in the price to performance

just deal with it intel fans!

the FPS in gaming are so close, and eaven somthimes the FX8350 beats the i7 in some games!

and when you look to the price, in netherlands the i73770k with stock cooler, cost 310 euro... the FX8350 cost 175 euro.... thats a 135 euro diffrence... for that money you buy a Asus M5A99FX pro r2.0 board.. as well...

im very happy with my AMD FX8350..



posted 3 years 7 months ago

Its really is amazing to think that you can get a mobo and a cpu from AMD for the same price as just the CPU from intel. And not a cheap crappy board but a decent one for overclocking. 

I have also been very happy with my 8350.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

"I'm very technical. Don't argue with me."

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I don't know a whole lot about the builds, but does it make a difference that they were not identical? As a scientist, I hate to see an experiment with more than one variable.

posted 3 years 7 months ago

I really like the work I have seen you doing comparing the FX chip to Intel but am wondering if there a chance to lower the bar a bit, say an FX 6000 series or even the 4000 series vs the i5?

posted 3 years 7 months ago

Why does Toms hardware always recomend intel cpus for everthing even though the 8350 performs identical to the 3770k and outperforms the 3570k in applications that use more then 2 cores?

posted 3 years 7 months ago

i hope you didn't quit your day job.


posted 3 years 6 months ago

can u make an overclocking guide for the fx-8350 on this motherboard

posted 3 years 5 months ago



Could anyone compare the FX-8120 VS FX-83X0?

I got the FX-8120 and I have to ask should I get the new FX-83X0 series!


posted 3 years 5 months ago

Honestly I would wait till steamroller comes out because the 8120 is still overclockable as heck.  Now if it goes on sale for say 170 or lower jump on it.  

posted 3 years 5 months ago

i think this means that the ongoing battle between AMD and Intel is going to get even closer in Haswell vs Steamroller. depending on how each changed their arcitecture. 

posted 3 years 5 months ago

I dont think the arcitecture is going to change i think there just going to be fine tuned vershons of older chips 

but who knows its going to be interesting regardless.

posted 2 years 12 months ago

How would the AMD CPU do in office related work?

posted 2 years 9 months ago

it'll Intel Kill it!

posted 2 years 9 months ago

I got my FX 8350 on sale for $159. I threw in a RevoDrive x3 and all I can say is My AMD easily smoked all i7 i5 i whatevers in ATTO CPU Benchmark. I'm getting like 70+ fps in ARMA 3, BF4, COD Ghosts, and more in 1080p. Intel is over hyped... For the price of an Intel build you can build 2 AMD systems and out render any single i7 build. More bang for the buck!. Feel sorry for all those that got ripped off by Intel. i7 on a PC is a poor mans Apple. I worked for Apple for 5+ years and would never buy anything with an Apple on it or what's in an Apple. You can thank Apple for driving up the those intel prices. I will never buy Intel. AMD for life. Anyone that tells you intel is better is full of it. my fx6300 will smoke any intel I whatever.

posted 2 years 9 months ago

next Intel Chips are soldered to the motherboard. Intel is trying to kill the Custom build Desktop Market.