Key Differences
In short — Core i9-12900K 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 i9-12900K is 3299 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 55% cheaper than Core i9-12900K - CA$189.27 vs CA$417.61
- Up to 50% better value when playing Red Dead Redemption 2 than Core i9-12900K - CA$1.27 vs CA$2.52 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-12900K
- Performs up to 11% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than FX-8320 - 166 vs 149 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 24 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
149
89%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.27/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$189.27
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$189.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 63 minutes ago
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
FPS
166
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$2.52/FPS
50%
Price, CA$
CA$417.61
45%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$417.61 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 63 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Core i9-12900K |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Nov 4th, 2021 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Alder Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |