The FX-8320 is the comparison's loser – it's a slower gaming CPU than the Celeron G3930T and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $56.77 more expensive!
Advantages of the FX-8320
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of the Celeron G3930T
- A faster CPU for gaming
- Up to 62% cheaper – $35.14 vs $91.91
- A much better value for money for gaming
- Consumes up to 72% less energy – 35 vs 125 Watts
FX-8320 vs Celeron G3930T for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Celeron G3930T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
169
100%
Min 1% FPS
113
100%
Price, €
€35.14
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.2/FPS
100%
FX-8320 vs Celeron G3930T in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320 vs Celeron G3930T in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320 vs Celeron G3930T in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Celeron G3930T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
2 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.7 GHz
77%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
FX-8320 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Celeron G3930T |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
| $169.00 | MSRP | Not Available |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
| Vishera | Codename | Kaby Lake |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Performance | ||
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Frequency | 2.7 GHz |
| 3.7 GHz | Turbo Frequency | Non-Turbo |
8 MB | L3 Cache | 2 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | DDR4 @ 2400 MHz |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
