Key Differences
In short — Core i9-11900K outperforms the cheaper FX-8320E on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320E is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-11900K is 2387 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320E.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Up to 33% cheaper than Core i9-11900K - $130.17 vs $193.77
- Up to 23% better value when playing F1 22 than Core i9-11900K - $0.58 vs $0.75 per FPS
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i9-11900K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-11900K
- Performs up to 14% better in F1 22 than FX-8320E - 287 vs 251 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 16 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320E doesn't have integrated graphics
F1 22
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Buy for €144.49 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13252 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
287
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.75/FPS
77%
Price, €
€215.08
67%
FPS Winner
Buy for €215.08 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 13252 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320E | vs | Intel Core i9-11900K |
---|---|---|
Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Rocket Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.3 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
16.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |