In GRID, the Celeron G6900 is same performance as the FX-8320. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron G6900
- Is 9 years and 2 months newer – Jan 04, 2022 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 9 years and 2 months newer
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 46 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
FX-8320
No clear advantages
GRID FPS Calculator
Celeron G6900 vs FX-8320: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
483 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
291 FPS
100%
Price, $
$88.1
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.18/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron G6900 vs FX-8320 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron G6900 vs FX-8320 in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron G6900
Jan 4th, 2022
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
97%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron G6900 Jan 4th, 2022 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 4th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
$52.00 | MSRP | $169.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1700 | Socket | AM3+ |
46W | Power Consumption | 125W |
| Other Features | ||
| 3200 MHz (DDR4), 4800 MHz (DDR5) | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 710 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
