Well I use review sites instead of guts. But here a few facts with sources for you.

Beginning with the prices.

4770k = 273€, FX-8370E = 183€ (that's 50% more expensive)

http://geizhals.de/intel-core-i7-4770k-bx80646i74770k-a928911.html

http://geizhals.de/amd-fx-8370e-fd837ewmhkbox-a1155963.html

4700k vs 8370E performance rating in games without graphics bottleneck(low resolution)

http://www.computerbase.de/2014-09/amd-fx-8370e-im-test/2/#diagramm-abschliessendes-performancerating

That's 50% more performance where it counts. (I admit this is an aggregated rating and in some games the AMD CPU is only 30% behind)

Power Consumption at full performance

http://www.computerbase.de/2014-09/amd-fx-8370e-im-test/3/#diagramm-leistungsaufnahme-volllast-prime95

I have to reitterate here since the 30W I took are at a balanced load and not full performance. At full performance it's actually more than 40W difference.

What's even more appalling, the CPU takes 20W more just to idle!

So we have 50% more power in games, a minimum power advantage of 20W(going up to 50 at full performance) and all that for only 50% more cost.

This package looks less and less appealing. But as I said, it's good value for a lower price. Which is pretty much the only good thing to say about AMD CPUs. If you consider performance and power consumption it sucks balls.

(BTW computerbase.de is one of the oldest and respected independent computer websites in Germany)

The link you provided indicates a performance difference more in the 30% range than 50.

And here is what it costs for a 4770k in my country:

359.99$ on newegg and NCIX.

Starting at 368.99 on amazon.

Compared to the 200$ price point of the FX-8370.

And cut the "going by guts" crap. You're obviously insinuating something and that's just flame baiting.

Sorry, you can't get better value in your country.

Also, where does it say 30%? Looks like 54% to me. That's an aggregated performance rating of 8 games with the graphics bottleneck removed.

I don't read german. I didn't check the upper chart, for some reason. My bad.

In any case, I go with guru3d for my stuff. They don't make aggregates based on arbitrarily chosen games like your site, but they've always been pretty reliable to me. Never made a purchase I regretted by going from their analyses.

I think you are paying for the APU though.  So its not apples to apples.

It's hardly ever apples to apples. Although you have a point. The FX-8370 doesn't have an on-chip GPU. It has 8 cores though, compared to 4 for 4770k. Considering how things develop right now, more and more software are going to be built to harvest the performances of an 8 core architecture. But even that could be considered moot. Since by the time those software come out, newer chips just as affordable as this one will be released... 

All things considered, the chip is still quite a good bang for the bucks based on most reviews I've read about it so far.

i liked the vid, thanks OP.

i have a amd 8350 and its worked great so far as i have had it for a year now. intel is a better chip but waaaaaaaay overpriced for my build.

I have to agree.  When I was building my rig.  I was really trying to stay in a budget.  So when I looked at the performance of AMD FX series (and of course to Intel's CPU series) I did an crap load of research and found that I would probably better performance/$ by going with the FX series.  Plus, I felt that it gave me greater flexablity in future upgrades, which lends itself to your point about newer chips.

You can get the 6 Core 6300 for only $109. If you building a gaming pc you cant beat AMD for the prices.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113286&cm_re=6300-_-19-113-286-_-Product

I see a lot of people just reading site benchmarks and repeating what they hear and very little first hand experience. Yes Intel beats AMD however I've played around and benchmarked a lot of AMD and Intel CPUs and there are a few things to consider:

1. Type of build - There are AMD CPUs that makes sense for a lot of builds. Most review sites grab a Titan or a 290X and use low resolution to show that Intel CPUs are better when it comes to games running 100+ frames per second. for most people that grab a GTX 750 Ti or a 270X, and game on 1080p, a 6 core AMD CPU is a smart choice considering it is 100 bucks cheaper than a 4670k

2. Monitor setup - What resolution are you gaming on? What refresh rate? If an intel CPU is getting 120 fps and AMD is getting 90, and you are gaming on a 60 hz monitor...you will not see any difference. In fact you are best turning on VSync and running at constant 60 fps. Also for monitor surround and 4K or anything that is GPU bound, a $200 dollar AMD mobo and CPU will perform very close to if not identical to a $600 dollar Intel one. Even with 780Tis in SLI or something high end...

3. DirectX 12 wildcard - DirectX 12 is supposed to bring multicore scalability that isn't available today. Having a 6 or 8 core AMD processor may be more future proof than most people think.

With that said, Intel CPUs are better no doubt about it, but for someone on a limited budget getting an AMD CPU + mobo could mean being able to add an SSD or better GPU to the mix and have better performance than going Intel.