Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Celeron G6900 outperforms the more expensive FX-8320 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Celeron G6900 is 3360 days newer than the more expensive FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G6900 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G6900
- Performs up to 18% better in Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition than FX-8320 - 210 vs 178 FPS
- Up to 57% cheaper than FX-8320 - CA$112.98 vs CA$264.27
- Up to 64% better value when playing Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition than FX-8320 - CA$0.54 vs CA$1.48 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Shadow of the Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Buy for CA$264.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 166 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
FPS
210
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.54/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$112.98
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$112.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 166 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Celeron G6900 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
FX | Collection | Celeron |
Vishera | Codename | Alder Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | Not Available |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |