Key Differences
In short — Core i7-10700F outperforms the cheaper FX-8320E on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320E is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-10700F is 2067 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320E.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Up to 21% cheaper than Core i7-10700F - $178.02 vs $225.99
- Up to 14% better value when playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Core i7-10700F - $0.94 vs $1.09 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-10700F
- Performs up to 9% better in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than FX-8320E - 208 vs 190 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD FX-8320E - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 16 vs 8 threads
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for $178.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 151 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
208
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.09/FPS
86%
Price, $
$225.99
78%
FPS Winner
Buy for $225.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 151 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320E | vs | Intel Core i7-10700F |
---|---|---|
Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i7 |
Vishera | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
16.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |