Buy on Amazon
€144.49
In Stock
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
No items available
Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900K outperforms FX-8320E on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900K is 2067 days newer than FX-8320E.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900K
- Performs up to 8% better in Battlefield 1 than FX-8320E - 247 vs 229 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 20 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320E doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield 1
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
AMD FX-8320E Octa-core (8 Core) 3.20 GHz Processor - Socket AM3+OEM Pack - 8 MB - 8 MB Cache - Yes - 4 GHz Overclocking Speed - 32 nm - 95 W - FD832EWMW8KHK
Buy for €144.49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 77113 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-8320E
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Core i9-10900K
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320E | vs | Intel Core i9-10900K |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
| FX | Collection | Core i9 |
| Vishera | Codename | Comet Lake |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 8 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
| 3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
| 4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.3 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 125 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 16.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
| Yes | Overclockable | Yes |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.