Key Differences
In short — Core i7-9700K 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 Core i7-9700K is 2187 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 63% cheaper than Core i7-9700K - $102.02 vs $279.13
- Up to 57% better value when playing Battlefield V than Core i7-9700K - $0.49 vs $1.13 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-9700K
- Performs up to 19% better in Battlefield V than FX-8320 - 248 vs 208 FPS
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 95 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
83.87096774193549%
Value, $/FPS
$0.49/FPS
100%
Price, $
$102.02
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $102.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349096 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
FPS
248
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.13/FPS
43.36283185840708%
Price, $
$279.13
36%
FPS Winner
Buy for $279.13 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349097 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320 | vs | Intel Core i7-9700K |
---|---|---|
Oct 23rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 19th, 2018 |
FX | Collection | Core i7 |
Vishera | Codename | Coffee Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 95 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.5x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |