 This video is brought to you by our trusted graphics partner, NVIDIA. Welcome to part 2 of our 3570K vs 8350 testing. So, just to reiterate, we've already done no anti-aliasing on a number of popular games. Now what we've decided to do is crank up the details. Now any of the games where the maximum presets were already factoring in high anti-aliasing settings, those ones you're going to discover actually haven't changed. Whereas everything else, what we're doing is we're taking our GTX 660 Ti, which is the card we're using for our standard test bench, and we are taxing it. So we're looking at more of the GPU bound scenario, what happens to the CPU in this situation. Because a lot of the hubbub right now is the 8350, which is an 8-core processor, so we're running that on a Crosshair V formula. The 8350 is a very legitimate choice for a gaming platform if you're running at realistic settings. Now of course, all day we could run Quake 3 flybys and time how long it takes to run, and run at 640x480, and that would really separate out the single threaded CPU performance of every chip on the market. But it's not realistic. So that's why we're taking this realistic approach where we have two identical test platforms. In fact, it's this test platform except over there. So we're running the 8350 overclocked to 4.6 GHz, we're running our 3570K overclocked to 4.4 GHz. The reason we chose those numbers was that we wanted something that is realistically attainable by you like 99% of the time. So almost anyone running these chips can reach those frequencies with guides that have actually been published in videos that I've done in the past. So there's really no excuse for not being able to do that. So that's why we ran at those settings. We're running 8 gigs of Mushkin whatever it's called, Blackline memory, 1600 MHz CL9. Nothing special about it. We're running a 128 gig Vertex 4 SSD and Republic of Gamers motherboards for both platforms. Some in-win power supply that doesn't really affect performance in any meaningful way. And we're liquid cooling the CPUs using an H100 from Corsair just so that we get good stability at those overclocked settings. So let's start with Metro 2033. In Metro 2033, the 3570K really pulls ahead of the 8350. So this is on the high preset with an isotropic filtering at 16x and anti-aliasing at 4x. Our next one is Dirt 3 and in Dirt 3, we see the same situation where the 3570K pulls ahead by about 10%. So this is actually, yeah, this is a tangible win, but not something you're actually going to feel when you're playing the game itself. In Skyrim, we see another victory for the 3570K. However, it should be noted that in Skyrim, we're running 18 aftermarket mods from the Steam Workshop. And we're not sure how those affect any optimizations that are made on a platform by platform basis. So it's possible that our particular Skyrim setup is inherently runs better on Intel. And unfortunately, there's not really a whole lot we can do about that. Up next, we've got Battlefield 3, where the FX8350 actually comes out ahead. Now, Battlefield 3 was one of the first really multi-threading aware AAA gaming titles that you started to see a tangible benefit with more cores. So FX8350 doing well here actually makes a lot of sense because it is clocked a little bit higher. Did I say 4.4 GHz for the 3570K? Because what I meant was 4.2. Sorry about that, guys. So what we see here is that with its higher frequency and the fact that it's multi-threading aware, it does really well. So we're running four times MSAA anti-aliasing. Next up, we've got Crisis 3. So this is one of the ones where there's been a lot of discussion about how Crisis 3 is heavily multi-threading aware. And I've seen I've even seen proclamations that the 8350 just, you know, wrecks the 3570K. But those seem pretty isolated. And the most of the data out there seems to support our conclusion, which is that the 3570K ekes out a victory here. It's not by much. It's only by about 10 percent. But that for all intents and purposes, they are very close in performance. And I mean, OK, we're going to move on to our last benchmark here, which is that's not our last one. Yeah, they're very close in terms of performance. So we're not really seeing the whole huge difference in performance favoring the 8350. Far Cry 3 is a different situation with the 8350 winning by 10 percent. Now, the weird thing is both of these games are based on CryEngine 3. So it looks like whatever individual optimizations the game developers have put into their titles, for whatever reason, one of them favors AMD more than the other one does. So it tells us a couple of things. Number one, Crysis 3 doesn't necessarily run better on AMD. But number two, CryEngine 3 can. StarCraft 2, we're including just kind of for lulls, but Intel runs away with this one. StarCraft 2 seems to be heavily single threaded performance dependent. And our last title is Crysis 2. So not Crysis 3, Crysis 2, where we see a very similar story to Crysis 3, with the 3570K coming out ahead by about 10 percent. So what does all this mean? Like what CPU should you actually buy? Because remember guys, 3570K doesn't have hyperthreading. So when you have a heavily threaded workload, say for example you're doing video rendering, 3D rendering, heavy, heavy Photoshop use, where you're going to be able to take advantage of those multiple cores, the 8350 may actually be a better choice for you because the 3570 is quad core and the 8350 is four bulldozer modules, each of which is kind of like a core and a half. So you're going to have just more horsepower, more oomph to throw at heavily multi-threaded applications. With that in mind, I don't know what you're gesturing. We have three minutes left. Oh, okay. With that in mind, the 3570K does pull ahead in the single threaded heavy applications and does run cooler and does consume less power. So depending on how much power costs in your particular area, that may be a factor for you, but it should be noted that you're looking at probably a few dollars a year in terms of the actual power difference, depending again on how much power costs in your area. Here in BC, Canada, it's cheap, so it's not something that we think about nearly as much as if you lived, say for example, in California where it can be very expensive. So I think that pretty much wraps it up. They're both viable gaming platforms. At the end of the day, you have to look at the results, go, okay, this is the average FPS. Am I going to notice the difference between 5 FPS or 3 FPS or 10 FPS here and there? If you think you will, go for whichever one comes out on top. And if you think you won't, then go for whichever one is going to serve you better as an overall platform. Thanks for checking out this video on Linus Tech Tips. As always, don't forget to subscribe.