Key Differences
In short — Core i9-12900K outperforms the cheaper FX-8320 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-12900K is 3299 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of FX-8320
- Up to 64% cheaper than Core i9-12900K - $82.80 vs $230.09
- Up to 52% better value when playing Battlefield V than Core i9-12900K - $0.44 vs $0.91 per FPS
Advantages of Core i9-12900K
- Performs up to 35% better in Battlefield V than FX-8320 - 281 vs 208 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 24 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €91.91 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 15 minutes ago
Buy for €255.4 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 15 minutes ago
Trending Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
FX-8320 | vs | Core i9-12900K |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Nov 4th, 2021 |
FX | Collection | Core i9 |
Vishera | Codename | Alder Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 16 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |