Buy on Amazon
£499
In Stock
Availability
Availability
No items available
AvailabilityMSRP in USD: $499
Availability
MSRP in USD: $499
Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 3900XT outperforms FX-8320E on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen 9 3900XT is 2135 days newer than FX-8320E.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Consumes up to 10% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT - 95 vs 105 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT
- Performs up to 26% better in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 than FX-8320E - 113 vs 90 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 24 vs 8 threads
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Ryzen 9 3900XT
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
FPS
113
100%
Value, £/FPS
£4.42/FPS
100%
Price, £
£499
100%
FPS and Value Winner
AMD Ryzen™ 9 3900XT Processor (12C/24T, 70MB Cache, Up to 4.7 GHz Max Boost) – Without Cooler
Buy for £499 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 119 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
FX-8320E
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Ryzen 9 3900XT
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320E | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2020 |
| FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
| Vishera | Codename | Matisse |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 8 | Cores | 12 |
| 8 | Threads | 24 |
| 3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
| 4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
| 16.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | None |
| Yes | Overclockable | Yes |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
