Key Differences
In short — Core i7-10700F outperforms the cheaper FX-8320 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-10700F is 2746 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 29% cheaper than Core i7-10700F - CA$264.27 vs CA$373.07
- Up to 13% better value when playing World of Warcraft than Core i7-10700F - CA$1.7 vs CA$1.96 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-10700F
- Performs up to 23% better in World of Warcraft than FX-8320 - 190 vs 155 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 16 vs 8 threads
World of Warcraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
155
81%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.7/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$264.27
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$264.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 168 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
190
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.96/FPS
86%
Price, CA$
CA$373.07
70%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$373.07 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 169 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Core i7-10700F |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i7 |
Vishera | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |