Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 3900XT outperforms the cheaper Core i3-10320 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-10320 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 9 3900XT is 68 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-10320.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Up to 64% cheaper than Ryzen 9 3900XT - CA$259.45 vs CA$728.41
- Up to 64% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Ryzen 9 3900XT - CA$1.37 vs CA$3.77 per FPS
- Consumes up to 38% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT - 65 vs 105 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT
- Performs up to 2% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i3-10320 - 193 vs 190 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10320 - 24 vs 8 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
190
98%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.37/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$259.45
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$259.45 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7 minutes ago
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
FPS
193
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$3.77/FPS
36%
Price, CA$
CA$728.41
35%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$728.41 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2020 |
Core i3 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Matisse |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 105 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |