In Dead Space, the FX-8320 is slightly slower than the Ryzen 9 9900X3D. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $481 cheaper!
FX-8320
- Up to 85% cheaper – $88.10 vs $569.00
- Up to 85% cheaper
- Up to 83% better value in Dead Space – $0.50 vs $2.96/FPS
- Up to 83% better value in Dead Space
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
- Up to 10% faster in Dead Space – 192 vs 174 FPS
- Up to 10% faster in Dead Space
- Is 12 years and 2 months newer – Jan 06, 2025 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 12 years and 2 months newer
- Consumes up to 4% less energy – 120 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 4% less energy
Dead Space FPS Calculator
FX-8320 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
174 FPS
91%
Min 1% FPS
89 FPS
80%
Price, $
$88.1
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.5/FPS
100%
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
Jan 6th, 2025
Average FPS
192 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
111 FPS
100%
Price, $
$569
15%
Value, $/FPS
$2.96/FPS
17%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320 vs Ryzen 9 9900X3D in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
67%
L3 Cache
8 MB
6%
Base Frequency
3.5 GHz
80%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
73%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen 9 9900X3D
Jan 6th, 2025
Cores
12-core
100%
L3 Cache
128 MB
100%
Base Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.5 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320 Oct 23rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen 9 9900X3D Jan 6th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 6th, 2025 |
$169.00 | MSRP | $599.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | AM5 |
| 125W | Power Consumption | 120W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 5600 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | Radeon Graphics |
| Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
