Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Ryzen 9 5900X outperforms the cheaper FX-8320 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Ryzen 9 5900X is 2935 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 26% cheaper than Ryzen 9 5900X - CA$264.27 vs CA$358.98
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
- Performs up to 50% better in Rust than FX-8320 - 231 vs 154 FPS
- Up to 10% better value when playing Rust than FX-8320 - CA$1.55 vs CA$1.72 per FPS
- Consumes up to 16% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 105 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 24 vs 8 threads
Rust
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Buy for CA$264.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 86 minutes ago
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
FPS
231
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.55/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$358.98
73%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$358.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 87 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 5900X |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Nov 5th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Vishera | Codename | Vermeer |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 105 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |