In Rust, the Core i5-7400T is slightly faster than the FX-8320 and it's also a slightly better value for money, as it's $10 cheaper!
Core i5-7400T
- Up to 3% faster in Rust – 216 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Rust
- Is 4 years and 2 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 4 years and 2 months newer
- Up to 11% cheaper – $78.02 vs $88.10
- Up to 11% cheaper
- Up to 14% better value in Rust – $0.36 vs $0.42/FPS
- Up to 14% better value in Rust
- Consumes up to 72% less energy – 35 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 72% less energy
FX-8320
No clear advantages
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs FX-8320: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
216 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
48 FPS
100%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.36/FPS
100%
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
209 FPS
97%
Min 1% FPS
41 FPS
85%
Price, $
$88.1
88%
Value, $/FPS
$0.42/FPS
86%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs FX-8320 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs FX-8320 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
4-core
50%
L3 Cache
6 MB
75%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
69%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
75%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 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
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | $169.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
35 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| HD 630 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
