Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600K outperforms the cheaper FX-8320E on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8320E is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600K is 2387 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320E.
Advantages of AMD FX-8320E
- Up to 10% cheaper than Core i5-11600K - $178.02 vs $198.9
- Up to 10% better value when playing Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands than Core i5-11600K - $0.94 vs $1.04 per FPS
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600K
- Performs up to 2% better in Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands than FX-8320E - 192 vs 189 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8320E - 12 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-8320E doesn't have integrated graphics
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for $178.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280936 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
192
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.04/FPS
90%
Price, $
$198.9
89%
FPS Winner
Buy for $198.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 280937 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 2nd, 2014
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8320E | vs | Intel Core i5-11600K |
---|---|---|
Sep 2nd, 2014 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Vishera | Codename | Rocket Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 12 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 125 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
16.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |