i5-540UM vs FX-8320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.43
+444%
Core i5-540UM
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 18 Watt
0.63

FX-8320 outperforms Core i5-540UM by a whopping 444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15492766
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Core i5
Power efficiency2.603.31
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Arrandale (2010−2011)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)24 May 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$250

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.5 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz2 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rateno data1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data9
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache8192 KB512 KB
L3 cacheno data3 MB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm281+114 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million382+177 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM3+BGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX+-
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM 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-8320 and Core i5-540UM. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data12.799 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data500 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
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-8320 3.43
+444%
i5-540UM 0.63

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-8320 5443
+443%
i5-540UM 1002

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.43 0.63
Recency 23 October 2012 24 May 2010
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 8 4
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 18 Watt

FX-8320 has a 444.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 300% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

i5-540UM, on the other hand, has 594.4% lower power consumption.

The FX-8320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-540UM in performance tests.

Note that FX-8320 is a desktop processor while Core i5-540UM is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Core i5-540UM, 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-8320
FX-8320
Intel Core i5-540UM
Core i5-540UM

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.


4.2 1389 votes

Rate FX-8320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core i5-540UM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or Core i5-540UM, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.