Key Differences
In short — Celeron G6900 outperforms FX-8320 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Celeron G6900 is 3360 days newer than FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G6900 - 8 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G6900
- Performs up to 4% better in Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order than FX-8320 - 219 vs 211 FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
FX-8320
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Celeron G6900
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Celeron G6900 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
| FX | Collection | Celeron |
| Vishera | Codename | Alder Lake |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 2 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
| 3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
| 125 W | TDP | Not Available |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
| 17.5x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
