AMD FX-8320E vs Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650

Comparative analysis of AMD FX-8320E and Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Peripherals, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization, Security & Reliability. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FX-8320E

• CPU is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 10 month(s) later
• 4 more cores, run more applications at once: 8 vs 4
• Around 33% higher clock speed: 4 GHz vs 3 GHz
• Around 9% higher maximum core temperature: 70.50°C vs 64.5°C
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 32 nm SOI vs 45 nm
• Around 50% more L1 cache; more data can be stored in the L1 cache for quick access later
• Around 37% lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 130 Watt
• Around 6% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 495 vs 465
• Around 54% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 2254 vs 1463

Reasons to consider the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650

• Around 50% more L2 cache; more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
• Around 85% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score: 4864 vs 2625

Compare benchmarks

CPU 1: AMD FX-8320E
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650

Geekbench 4 - Single Core	CPU 1 CPU 2	495 465
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core	CPU 1 CPU 2	2254 1463
3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score	CPU 1 CPU 2	2625 4864

Compare specifications (specs)