i3-3217U vs FX-4320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4320
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.06
+158%

FX-4320 outperforms Core i3-3217U by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19222625
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core i3
Power efficiency1.984.29
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$225

Detailed specifications

FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed4 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache192 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB256K (per core)
L3 cache4096 KB3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size315 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM3+FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AVX
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel HD Graphics 4000
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U.

PCIe versionNot Listed2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FX-4320 2.06
+158%
i3-3217U 0.80

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

FX-4320 3150
+157%
i3-3217U 1225

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.06 0.80
Recency 23 October 2012 1 June 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 17 Watt

FX-4320 has a 157.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and 100% more physical cores.

i3-3217U, on the other hand, has a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 458.8% lower power consumption.

The FX-4320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-3217U in performance tests.

Note that FX-4320 is a desktop processor while Core i3-3217U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4320 and Core i3-3217U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD FX-4320
FX-4320
Intel Core i3-3217U
Core i3-3217U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 135 votes

Rate FX-4320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 533 votes

Rate Core i3-3217U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4320 or Core i3-3217U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.