FX-8320E vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G
2021
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
13.06
+319%
FX-8320E
2014
8 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
3.12

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G outperforms FX-8320E by a whopping 319% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking5821626
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.83
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Power efficiency18.923.09
Architecture codenameCezanne (2021−2024)Vishera (2012−2015)
Release date1 June 2021 (3 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$147

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed3.9 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz4 GHz
Multiplier39no data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache512K (per core)8192 KB
L3 cache16 MBno data
Chip lithography7 nm32 nm
Die size180 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)95 °Cno data
Number of transistors10,700 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplier-+
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.075 V - Max: 1.2875 V

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E 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
SocketAM4AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR3
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon Vega 7On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E.

PCIe version3.0n/a

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G 13.06
+319%
FX-8320E 3.12

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G 20741
+318%
FX-8320E 4960

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G 1920
+338%
FX-8320E 438

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.

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G 7161
+325%
FX-8320E 1685

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.06 3.12
Recency 1 June 2021 2 September 2014
Physical cores 6 8
Threads 12 8
Chip lithography 7 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 95 Watt

Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G has a 318.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 50% more threads, a 357.1% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

FX-8320E, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores.

The Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-8320E in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and FX-8320E, 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 Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G
Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G
AMD FX-8320E
FX-8320E

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.


4.2 133 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1116 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G or FX-8320E, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.