In The Last of Us Part II, the FX-8320 is faster than the Core Ultra 9 285 and it's also a much better value for money, as it's $475 cheaper!
FX-8320
- Up to 18% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 201 vs 170 FPS
- Up to 18% faster in The Last of Us Part II
- Up to 84% cheaper – $88.10 vs $563.41
- Up to 84% cheaper
- Up to 87% better value in The Last of Us Part II – $0.43 vs $3.31/FPS
- Up to 87% better value in The Last of Us Part II
Core Ultra 9 285
- Is 12 years and 2 months newer – Jan 14, 2025 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 12 years and 2 months newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
FX-8320 vs Core Ultra 9 285: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
201 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
151 FPS
100%
Price, $
$88.1
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Average FPS
170 FPS
85%
Min 1% FPS
127 FPS
84%
Price, $
$563.41
15%
Value, $/FPS
$3.31/FPS
13%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
33%
L3 Cache
8 MB
22%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
71%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
71%
Turbo Frequency
5.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285 Jan 14th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Released | Jan 14th, 2025 |
$169.00 | MSRP | $579.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1851 |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
