In Rust, the FX-8320 is slightly slower than the Ryzen 5 3600X. However, it's a slightly better value for money, as it's $18 cheaper!
FX-8320
- Up to 17% cheaper – $88.10 vs $105.89
- Up to 17% cheaper
- Up to 7% better value in Rust – $0.42 vs $0.45/FPS
- Up to 7% better value in Rust
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Ryzen 5 3600X
- Up to 12% faster in Rust – 234 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 12% faster in Rust
- Is 6 years and 8 months newer – Jul 07, 2019 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 6 years and 8 months newer
- Consumes up to 24% less energy – 95 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 24% less energy
Rust FPS Calculator
FX-8320 vs Ryzen 5 3600X: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
209 FPS
89%
Min 1% FPS
41 FPS
67%
Price, $
$88.1
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.42/FPS
100%
Ryzen 5 3600X
Jul 7th, 2019
Average FPS
234 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
61 FPS
100%
Price, $
$105.89
83%
Value, $/FPS
$0.45/FPS
93%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320 vs Ryzen 5 3600X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320 vs Ryzen 5 3600X in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
25%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
91%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen 5 3600X
Jul 7th, 2019
Cores
6-core
75%
L3 Cache
32 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
3200 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen 5 3600X Jul 7th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
$169.00 | MSRP | $249.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | AM4 |
| 125W | Power Consumption | 95W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4) |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
