Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 5 3400G outperforms the cheaper FX-8320 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 5 3400G is 2448 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 23% cheaper than Ryzen 5 3400G - $102.02 vs $132.0
- Up to 16% better value when playing Battlefield V than Ryzen 5 3400G - $0.49 vs $0.58 per FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 5 3400G
- Performs up to 10% better in Battlefield V than FX-8320 - 229 vs 208 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
208
90.82969432314411%
Value, $/FPS
$0.49/FPS
100%
Price, $
$102.02
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $102.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349463 minutes ago
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
FPS
229
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.58/FPS
84.48275862068965%
Price, $
$132
77%
FPS Winner
Buy for $132 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349464 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jul 7th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | AMD Ryzen 5 3400G |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 7th, 2019 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 5 |
Vishera | Codename | Picasso |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon RX Vega 11 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |