Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 outperforms Phenom II X4 925 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-10320 is 4007 days newer than Phenom II X4 925.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 19% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Phenom II X4 925 - 134 vs 113 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 8 vs 4 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Core i3-10320
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Phenom II X4 925
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Phenom II X4 925
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Single-Core
320
20.79272254710851%
Multi-Core
930
20.103761348897535%
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | AMD Phenom II X4 925 |
|---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | May 11th, 2009 |
| Core i3 | Collection | Phenom II X4 |
| Comet Lake | Codename | Deneb |
| Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 4 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
| 4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 45 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 14.0x |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| No | Overclockable | No |
