Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i5-12600K outperforms the more expensive FX-8320E on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i5-12600K is 2620 days newer than the more expensive FX-8320E.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-12600K
- Performs up to 26% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-8320E - 210 vs 167 FPS
- Up to 2% cheaper than FX-8320E - $173.99 vs $178.02
- Up to 22% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-8320E - $0.83 vs $1.07 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 16 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320E doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i5-12600K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
FPS
210
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.83/FPS
100%
Price, $
$173.99
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $173.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 61 minutes ago
Buy for $178.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 61 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Nov 4th, 2021
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-12600K | vs | AMD FX-8320E |
---|---|---|
Nov 4th, 2021 | Release Date | Sep 2nd, 2014 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Alder Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 8 |
16 | Threads | 8 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
4.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 95 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 16.0x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |