In Atomfall, the Core i5-660 is slightly slower than the FX-8320E. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $28 cheaper!
Core i5-660
- Up to 16% cheaper – $149.94 vs $178.02
- Up to 16% cheaper
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall – $0.80 vs $0.95/FPS
- Up to 16% better value in Atomfall
- Consumes up to 23% less energy – 73 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 23% less energy
FX-8320E
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall – 187 vs 186 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Atomfall
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer – Sep 02, 2014 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-660 vs FX-8320E: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-660
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
186 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$149.94
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.8/FPS
100%
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Average FPS
187 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
100%
Price, $
$178.02
84%
Value, $/FPS
$0.95/FPS
84%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-660 vs FX-8320E in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-660 vs FX-8320E in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-660
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.333 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.6 GHz
90%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
71%
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
96%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-660 Jan 7th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8320E Sep 2nd, 2014 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 7th, 2010 | Released | Sep 2nd, 2014 |
| $196.00 | MSRP | $147.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1156 | Socket | AM3+ |
73 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1333 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
