Key Differences
In short — Core i9-7900X outperforms the cheaper FX-6350 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6350 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-7900X is 1519 days newer than the cheaper FX-6350.
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Up to 75% cheaper than Core i9-7900X - $100.0 vs $400.0
- Up to 73% better value when playing Elden Ring than Core i9-7900X - $0.9 vs $3.28 per FPS
- Consumes up to 11% less energy than Intel Core i9-7900X - 125 vs 140 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-7900X
- Performs up to 10% better in Elden Ring than FX-6350 - 122 vs 111 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6350 - 20 vs 6 threads
Elden Ring
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
FPS
111
90.98360655737704%
Value, $/FPS
$0.9/FPS
100%
Price, $
$100
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $100 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349103 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
FPS
122
100%
Value, $/FPS
$3.28/FPS
27.439024390243905%
Price, $
$400
25%
FPS Winner
Buy for $400 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349103 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6350 | vs | Intel Core i9-7900X |
---|---|---|
Apr 29th, 2013 | Release Date | Jun 26th, 2017 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Skylake-E/EP |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 10 |
6 | Threads | 20 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 140 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
19.5x | Multiplier | 33.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |