Key Differences
In short — Xeon E5-2650 v3 outperforms FX-8320 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Xeon E5-2650 v3 is 685 days newer than FX-8320.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3
- Performs up to 4% better in Assassin's Creed Valhalla than FX-8320 - 174 vs 167 FPS
- Consumes up to 16% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 105 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320 - 20 vs 8 threads
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
FX-8320
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Xeon E5-2650 v3
Server/Workstation • Sep 8th, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2650 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Sep 8th, 2014 |
| FX | Collection | Xeon E5 |
| Vishera | Codename | Haswell |
| AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| 8 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.3 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
| 125 W | TDP | 105 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
| 17.5x | Multiplier | 23.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
