The Core i9-10900K is a clear winner – it's at least 2x faster gaming CPU than the FX-8320E and it's also a better value for money, as it's only $346.98 more expensive!
Advantages of the Core i9-10900K
- At least 2x faster CPU for gaming
- A better value for money for gaming
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 20 vs 8 threads
Advantages of the FX-8320E
- Up to 66% cheaper – $178.02 vs $525.00
- Consumes up to 24% less energy – 95 vs 125 Watts
Core i9-10900K vs FX-8320E for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Core i9-10900K
Apr 30th, 2020
Average FPS
194
100%
Min 1% FPS
128
100%
Price, $
$525
33%
Value, $/FPS
$2.7/FPS
39%
Core i9-10900K vs FX-8320E in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i9-10900K vs FX-8320E in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i9-10900K vs FX-8320E in core CPU performance specifications
Core i9-10900K
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
10-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2933 MHz
100%
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
80%
L3 Cache
8 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
86%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
75%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
64%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Core i9-10900K | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | FX-8320E |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Sep 2nd, 2014 |
| $547.00 | MSRP | $147.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
| Comet Lake | Codename | Vishera |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Performance | ||
10 | Cores | 8 |
20 | Threads | 8 |
3.7 GHz | Base Frequency | 3.2 GHz |
5.3 GHz | Turbo Frequency | 4.0 GHz |
20 MB | L3 Cache | 8 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR4 @ 2933 MHz | RAM | DDR3 @ 1866 MHz |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Yes | Overclockable | Yes |
