In The Last of Us Part I, the FX-8320E is slightly faster than the Core i9-12900K and it's also a better value for money, as it's $109 cheaper!
FX-8320E
- Up to 14% faster in The Last of Us Part I – 243 vs 214 FPS
- Up to 14% faster in The Last of Us Part I
- Up to 38% cheaper – $178.02 vs $286.95
- Up to 38% cheaper
- Up to 46% better value in The Last of Us Part I – $0.73 vs $1.34/FPS
- Up to 46% better value in The Last of Us Part I
- Consumes up to 24% less energy – 95 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 24% less energy
Core i9-12900K
- Is 7 years and 2 months newer – Nov 04, 2021 vs Sep 02, 2014
- Is 7 years and 2 months newer
The Last of Us Part I FPS Calculator
FX-8320E vs Core i9-12900K: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Average FPS
243 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
182 FPS
100%
Price, $
$178.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.73/FPS
100%
Core i9-12900K
Nov 4th, 2021
Average FPS
214 FPS
88%
Min 1% FPS
161 FPS
88%
Price, $
$286.95
62%
Value, $/FPS
$1.34/FPS
54%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320E vs Core i9-12900K in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320E vs Core i9-12900K in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
50%
L3 Cache
8 MB
27%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
77%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
39%
Core i9-12900K
Nov 4th, 2021
Cores
16-core
100%
L3 Cache
30 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320E Sep 2nd, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-12900K Nov 4th, 2021 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 2nd, 2014 | Released | Nov 4th, 2021 |
$147.00 | MSRP | $599.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1700 |
95 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4), 4800 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 770 |
| Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
