Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i5-6400 outperforms the more expensive FX-8320 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i5-6400 is 982 days newer than the more expensive FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-6400 - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-6400
- Performs up to 10% better in Battlefield V than FX-8320 - 229 vs 208 FPS
- Up to 2% cheaper than FX-8320 - $99.95 vs $102.02
- Up to 10% better value when playing Battlefield V than FX-8320 - $0.44 vs $0.49 per 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
89.79591836734694%
Price, $
$102.02
97%
Buy for $102.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 354038 minutes ago
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
FPS
229
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.44/FPS
100%
Price, $
$99.95
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $99.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 354040 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Core i5-6400 |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jul 2nd, 2015 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Vishera | Codename | Skylake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | HD Graphics 530 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |