EPYC 7302 vs FX-8320E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8320E
2014
8 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
3.21
EPYC 7302
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 155 Watt
21.34
+565%

EPYC 7302 outperforms FX-8320E by a whopping 565% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320E and EPYC 7302 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1571244
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data12.12
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date2 September 2014 (9 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$978

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8320E and EPYC 7302 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)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads832
Base clock speed3.2 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.3 GHz
Multiplierno data30
L1 cache384 KB1 MB
L2 cache8 MB8 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size315 mm2192 mm2
Number of transistors1,200 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320E and EPYC 7302 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 configuration12 (Multiprocessor)
SocketAM3+TR4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt155 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320E and EPYC 7302. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320E and EPYC 7302 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320E and EPYC 7302. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320E and EPYC 7302.

PCIe version2.0no data

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-8320E 3.21
EPYC 7302 21.34
+565%

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-8320E 4960
EPYC 7302 33002
+565%

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.

FX-8320E 446
EPYC 7302 1205
+170%

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.

FX-8320E 1700
EPYC 7302 8589
+405%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.21 21.34
Recency 2 September 2014 7 August 2019
Physical cores 8 16
Threads 8 32
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 155 Watt

FX-8320E has 63.2% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7302, on the other hand, has a 564.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7302 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-8320E in performance tests.

Note that FX-8320E is a desktop processor while EPYC 7302 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320E and EPYC 7302, 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-8320E
FX-8320E
AMD EPYC 7302
EPYC 7302

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.


4.3 1065 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 30 votes

Rate EPYC 7302 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320E or EPYC 7302, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.