Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms the more expensive FX-8370 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 1073 days newer than the more expensive FX-8370.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 8% better in Overwatch 2 than FX-8370 - 344 vs 320 FPS
- Up to 1% cheaper than FX-8370 - $250.0 vs $252.02
- Up to 8% better value when playing Overwatch 2 than FX-8370 - $0.73 vs $0.79 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8370 - 24 vs 8 threads
Advantages of AMD FX-8370
- Consumes up to 31% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 125 vs 180 Watts
Overwatch 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
344
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.73/FPS
100%
Price, $
$250
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $250 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 58237 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
FPS
320
93.02325581395348%
Value, $/FPS
$0.79/FPS
92.40506329113923%
Price, $
$252.02
99%
Buy for $252.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 58235 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X | vs | AMD FX-8370 |
---|---|---|
Aug 10th, 2017 | Release Date | Sep 2nd, 2014 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | FX |
Whitehaven | Codename | Vishera |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
12 | Cores | 8 |
24 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
180 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |