In Dead Space, the FX-8320E is slightly faster than the Core i3-4130T. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $154 more expensive!
FX-8320E
- Up to 1% faster in Dead Space – 175 vs 174 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Dead Space
- Is 1 year newer – Sep 02, 2014 vs Sep 01, 2013
- Is 1 year newer
Core i3-4130T
- Up to 87% cheaper – $23.99 vs $178.02
- Up to 87% cheaper
- Up to 87% better value in Dead Space – $0.13 vs $1.01/FPS
- Up to 87% better value in Dead Space
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 35 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
Dead Space FPS Calculator
FX-8320E vs Core i3-4130T: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Average FPS
175 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
89 FPS
100%
Price, $
$178.02
13%
Value, $/FPS
$1.01/FPS
13%
Core i3-4130T
Sep 1st, 2013
Average FPS
174 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
89 FPS
100%
Price, $
$23.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.13/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320E vs Core i3-4130T in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320E vs Core i3-4130T in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Core i3-4130T
Sep 1st, 2013
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
3 MB
38%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
91%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320E Sep 2nd, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-4130T Sep 1st, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 2nd, 2014 | Released | Sep 1st, 2013 |
| $147.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1150 |
| 95 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 4400 |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
