Key Differences
In short — FX-8320 outperforms Phenom II X4 925 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing FX-8320 is 1261 days newer than Phenom II X4 925.
Advantages of AMD Phenom II X4 925
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 95 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Performs up to 3% better in Sea of Thieves than Phenom II X4 925 - 204 vs 199 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 8 vs 4 threads
Sea of Thieves
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Mythical
Phenom II X4 925
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
FX-8320
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Phenom II X4 925
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Single-Core
320
69.71677559912854%
Multi-Core
930
51.12699285321606%
AMD Phenom II X4 925 | vs | AMD FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| May 11th, 2009 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| Phenom II X4 | Collection | FX |
| Deneb | Codename | Vishera |
| AMD Socket AM3 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 4 | Cores | 8 |
| 4 | Threads | 8 |
| 2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 125 W |
| 45 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
| 14.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
