AMD vs. Intel is always going to be a hot topic, but it's best to try to look at facts rather than hype.
I guess the natural 'opponent' to the FX-8350 is the i5-4690K. I think there are pluses and minuses for both. This is my view but:
AMD FX 8350
+ 8 cores vs. 4
+ Higher performance on highly multithreaded applications (that can use all cores)
+ Overclocks pretty well
- Platform (FX990 etc) lacks PCIe 3.0, SATA Express, M2
- Higher power consumption
- Disappointing single threaded performance
- Getting a bit dated as it was released in 2012
+ Higher real world performance in majority of games and applications* Link
+ Higher per core performance
+ Better power efficiency
+ More advanced 22nm manufacturing process with tri-gate transistors
+ Newer Z97 platform offers PCIe 3.0, M2, SATA Express
+ Possible to use in small form factor (Mini-ITX system)
- Half as many cores/threads as the FX-8350
- More expensive
- Hot running when overclocked
- Doesn't always overclock as well as expected (no "5 Ghz on air" likely as Intel reps initially claimed) but still some potential
Bottom line IMO is the mid to high end Intel chips (including the i5-4690K) offers better real world performance in most games and most applications while using less power. The AMD total system build cost is going to be roughly $50-100 less, either saving money or allowing you to invest elsewhere like a more powerful GPU. Both could make a very capable gaming system, but the choice is up to you.
Edited by jonuk76, 19 September 2014 - 09:59 AM.