The Core i3-540 is the comparison's loser – it's a slightly slower gaming CPU than the FX-8320 and it's also a slightly worse value for money, as it's $6.68 more expensive!
Advantages of the Core i3-540
- Consumes up to 42% less energy – 73 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of the FX-8320
- A slightly faster CPU for gaming
- Up to 6% cheaper – $102.02 vs $108.70
- A slightly better value for money for gaming
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 8 vs 4 threads
Core i3-540 vs FX-8320 for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
187
100%
Min 1% FPS
132
100%
Price, $
$102.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.54/FPS
100%
Core i3-540 vs FX-8320 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-540 vs FX-8320 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-540 vs FX-8320 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-540
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.066 GHz
88%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 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 all specifications
Core i3-540 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 7th, 2010 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
$133.00 | MSRP | $169.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel Socket 1156 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
| Clarkdale | Codename | Vishera |
73 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Performance | ||
| 2 | Cores | 8 |
| 4 | Threads | 8 |
| 3.1 GHz | Base Frequency | 3.5 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Frequency | 4.0 GHz |
| 4 MB | L3 Cache | 8 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 @ 1333 MHz | RAM | DDR3 |
| Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
