Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i5-4690K outperforms the more expensive FX-8320 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i5-4690K is 587 days newer than the more expensive FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-4690K - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-4690K
- Performs up to 12% better in Ready or Not than FX-8320 - 263 vs 234 FPS
- Up to 48% cheaper than FX-8320 - $53.5 vs $102.02
- Up to 55% better value when playing Ready or Not than FX-8320 - $0.2 vs $0.44 per FPS
- Consumes up to 30% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 88 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320 doesn't have integrated graphics
Ready or Not
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
234
88.97338403041825%
Value, $/FPS
$0.44/FPS
45.45454545454546%
Price, $
$102.02
52%
Buy for $102.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 360836 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 2nd, 2014
FPS
263
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.2/FPS
100%
Price, $
$53.5
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $53.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 360837 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jun 2nd, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Core i5-4690K |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 2nd, 2014 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Vishera | Codename | Haswell |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 88 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |