Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400F 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 i5-9400F is 2268 days newer than the cheaper FX-8320.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400F
- Performs up to 5% better in Stray than FX-8320 - 184 vs 176 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-8320 - 65 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of AMD FX-8320
- Up to 9% cheaper than Core i5-9400F - $102.02 vs $112.0
- Up to 5% better value when playing Stray than Core i5-9400F - $0.58 vs $0.61 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-9400F - 8 vs 6 threads
Stray
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
FPS
184
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.61/FPS
95.08196721311475%
Price, $
$112
91%
FPS Winner
Buy for $112 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 358138 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
FPS
176
95.65217391304348%
Value, $/FPS
$0.58/FPS
100%
Price, $
$102.02
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $102.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 358137 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Desktop • Oct 23rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-9400F | vs | AMD FX-8320 |
---|---|---|
Jan 8th, 2019 | Release Date | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | FX |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Vishera |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 8 |
6 | Threads | 8 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 17.5x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |