Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900K outperforms the cheaper FX-8120 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8120 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900K is 3123 days newer than the cheaper FX-8120.
Advantages of AMD FX-8120
- Up to 82% cheaper than Core i9-10900K - $57.05 vs $314.41
- Up to 80% better value when playing The Last of Us Part I than Core i9-10900K - $0.5 vs $2.53 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900K
- Performs up to 9% better in The Last of Us Part I than FX-8120 - 138 vs 127 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8120 - 20 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8120 doesn't have integrated graphics
The Last of Us Part I
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €63.32 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 77 minutes ago
Buy for €349 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 77 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8120 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900K |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Zambezi | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 10 |
8 | Threads | 20 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
3.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.3 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
15.5x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |