Core i7-3820 vs FX-8320
Aggregated performance score
Core i7-3820 outperforms FX-8320 by 5% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-8320 and Core i7-3820 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1434 | 1383 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.42 | 2.32 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 23 October 2012 (11 years ago) | February 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $400 |
| Current price | $110 | $409 (1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i7-3820 has 63% better value for money than FX-8320.
Detailed specifications
FX-8320 and Core i7-3820 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 cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 10240 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 294 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 61 °C | 67 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 67 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 1270 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8320 and Core i7-3820 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3+ | FCLGA2011 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and Core i7-3820. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Smart Response | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
FX-8320 and Core i7-3820 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and Core i7-3820 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and Core i7-3820. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64.23 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 51.2 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and Core i7-3820.
| PCIe version | n/a | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 40 |
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.
Core i7-3820 outperforms FX-8320 by 5% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i7-3820 outperforms FX-8320 by 6% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-3820 outperforms FX-8320 by 35% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-3820 outperforms FX-8320 by 27% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
Benchmark coverage: 4%
FX-8320 outperforms Core i7-3820 by 4% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.53 | 3.72 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 130 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FX-8320 and Core i7-3820.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and Core i7-3820, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
