Key Differences
In short — Core i7-14700F 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 i7-14700F is 4094 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of FX-8320
- Up to 32% cheaper than Core i7-14700F - CA$317.97 vs CA$470.92
- Up to 7% better value when playing Battlefield V than Core i7-14700F - CA$1.53 vs CA$1.64 per FPS
Advantages of Core i7-14700F
- Performs up to 38% better in Battlefield V than FX-8320 - 287 vs 208 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 28 vs 8 threads
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
208
72%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.53/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$317.97
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$317.97 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1546 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
FPS
287
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.64/FPS
93%
Price, CA$
CA$470.92
67%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$470.92 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1546 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
FX-8320 | vs | Core i7-14700F |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2024 |
FX | Collection | Core i7 |
Vishera | Codename | Raptor Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 20 |
8 | Threads | 28 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.1 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.4 GHz |
125 W | TDP | Not Available |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 21.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |