Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 outperforms the cheaper FX-8300 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8300 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-10320 is 2746 days newer than the cheaper FX-8300.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 31% better in Rust than FX-8300 - 201 vs 154 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-8300 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8300 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8300
- Up to 49% cheaper than Core i3-10320 - €80.56 vs €159.18
- Up to 34% better value when playing Rust than Core i3-10320 - €0.52 vs €0.79 per FPS
Rust
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
201
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.79/FPS
65.82278481012658%
Price, €
€159.18
50%
FPS Winner
Buy for €159.18 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 288 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
154
76.61691542288557%
Value, €/FPS
€0.52/FPS
100%
Price, €
€80.56
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €80.56 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 31 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | AMD FX-8300 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Core i3 | Collection | FX |
Comet Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |