The FX-8320 is at least 2x slower gaming CPU than the Core i9-10900, however, it's a slightly better value for money, as it's $258.34 cheaper!
Advantages of the FX-8320
- Up to 74% cheaper – $91.90 vs $350.24
- A slightly better value for money for gaming
Advantages of the Core i9-10900
- At least 2x faster CPU for gaming
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 20 vs 8 threads
FX-8320 vs Core i9-10900 for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Core i9-10900
Apr 30th, 2020
Average FPS
212
100%
Min 1% FPS
147
100%
Price, €
€350.24
26%
Value, €/FPS
€1.65/FPS
30%
FX-8320 vs Core i9-10900 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320 vs Core i9-10900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320 vs Core i9-10900 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
80%
L3 Cache
8 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
77%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i9-10900
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
10-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
80%
Turbo Frequency
5.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2933 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
FX-8320 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Core i9-10900 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
$1.69 | MSRP | $4.83 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
| Vishera | Codename | Comet Lake |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Performance | ||
| 8 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
3.5 GHz | Base Frequency | 2.8 GHz |
| 4.0 GHz | Turbo Frequency | 5.2 GHz |
| 8 MB | L3 Cache | 20 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | DDR4 @ 2933 MHz |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
