Athlon X4 880K vs FX-8350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8350
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.74
+62.6%
Athlon X4 880K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.30

FX-8350 outperforms Athlon X4 880K by an impressive 63% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14751797
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.76no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD FX-Series (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency2.832.29
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Godaveri (2014−2016)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)December 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed4 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz4.2 GHz
L1 cacheno data256K
L2 cache8192 KB4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size315 mm2245 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million2,411 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier++
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM3+FM2+
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Core, HT3.1no data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-2133

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K.

PCIe versionn/a3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX-8350 3.74
+62.6%
Athlon X4 880K 2.30

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

FX-8350 5936
+62.2%
Athlon X4 880K 3659

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

FX-8350 487
Athlon X4 880K 598
+22.8%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

FX-8350 1983
+6.9%
Athlon X4 880K 1855

3DMark Fire Strike Physics

FX-8350 7380
+71.2%
Athlon X4 880K 4310

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.74 2.30
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 95 Watt

FX-8350 has a 62.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Athlon X4 880K, on the other hand, has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 31.6% lower power consumption.

The FX-8350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 880K in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 and Athlon X4 880K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD FX-8350
FX-8350
AMD Athlon X4 880K
Athlon X4 880K

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 3693 votes

Rate FX-8350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 52 votes

Rate Athlon X4 880K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8350 or Athlon X4 880K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.