FX-8320E vs Ryzen 9 3900
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms FX-8320E by a whopping 521% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 255 | 1517 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 35.25 | 0.91 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop) | no data |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) | Vishera (2012−2015) |
| Release date | 9 October 2019 (4 years ago) | 2 September 2014 (9 years ago) |
| Current price | $381 | $140 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 9 3900 has 3774% better value for money than FX-8320E.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 9 3900 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 cores | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 768 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 8192 KB |
| L3 cache | 64 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 315 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | Yes |
| P0 Vcore voltage | no data | Min: 1.075 V - Max: 1.2875 V |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 9 3900 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 (1331) | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | no data | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 51.196 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E.
| PCIe version | no data | n/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 9 3900 outperforms FX-8320E by 521% based on our aggregate 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%
Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms FX-8320E by 522% 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%
Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms FX-8320E by 271% 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%
Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms FX-8320E by 467% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 19.94 | 3.21 |
| Recency | 9 October 2019 | 2 September 2014 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 8 |
| Threads | 24 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
The Ryzen 9 3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-8320E in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3900 and FX-8320E, 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.
