In Deathloop, the FX-8320E is same performance as the Xeon E5-2690. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $119 more expensive!
FX-8320E
- Is 2 years and 5 months newer – Sep 02, 2014 vs Mar 06, 2012
- Is 2 years and 5 months newer
- Consumes up to 30% less energy – 95 vs 135 Watts
- Consumes up to 30% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Xeon E5-2690
- Up to 67% cheaper – $58.90 vs $178.02
- Up to 67% cheaper
- Up to 68% better value in Deathloop – $0.26 vs $0.80/FPS
- Up to 68% better value in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
FX-8320E vs Xeon E5-2690: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Average FPS
222 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
99%
Price, $
$178.02
33%
Value, $/FPS
$0.8/FPS
32%
Xeon E5-2690
Mar 6th, 2012
Average FPS
222 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
167 FPS
100%
Price, $
$58.9
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.26/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8320E vs Xeon E5-2690 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8320E vs Xeon E5-2690 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8320E
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
40%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
100%
Xeon E5-2690
Mar 6th, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
91%
Turbo Frequency
3.8 GHz
95%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8320E Sep 2nd, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Xeon E5-2690 Mar 6th, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Mar 6th, 2012 |
| $147.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Server |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA2011 |
95W | Power Consumption | 135W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | DDR3 |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
