I've let some FX4300 love go through, but you really need to stop this kind of Tom Foolery.
The thing about objective tests is that we don't need an opinion on interpreting results, they speak for themselves.
The 8350 performs on par with Intel processors released FOUR years ago. Not Sandy, but Lynnfield/Clarkdale. I've heard the arguments, "well what about when it's overclocked, etc etc".
The following benchmarks are performed at stock speeds. That means the 8350 has a 600MHz advantage over the Sandy/Ivy/Haswell i5/i7s.
Overclocked, you can get a 20-35% linear bump with the Intel processors. With Vishera, it's more like 10-25%. Now, where things really start to go wonky, is that Vishera will be using 225-275W when overclocked, and also requires a decent motherboard. So you end up spending a bit more with 8 phase power compared to 4 or 6 that you can use with Intel. Then you also need to wave goodbye to inexpensive power supplies, because that BP550 sure as hell isn't cutting it. You also need to add a much more powerful cooler than the CM Hyper 212+, because handling a 225-275W TDP is a lot to ask out of our resident favorite.
So now we have these hidden costs that creep up, in addition to the fact that the processors themselves perform like shit on a stick when it comes to gaming. At least in comparison to Intel processors.
This isn't IMO. This is empirical.
Kharma, even though we're just some people on a video game forum that has a thread about buying PC parts, there's a lot of people on GAF that will follow your advice. I'm not kidding when I say this thread gets more hits and offers more direct advice than a lot of official hardware review sites. You're offering bad advice when you've been shown that this is bad advice. It's like temporary amnesia or something.