CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 8320 vs 6350

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

FX 8320
7.5
FX 6350
7.2
Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

FX 8320
7.8
FX 6350
8.0
Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core)

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?

FX 8320
9.3
FX 6350
7.5
Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

FX 8320
8.2
FX 6350
8.5
Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

FX 8320
7.8
FX 6350
7.6

Winner
AMD FX 8320 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 8320  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

AMD FX 8320

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of AMD FX 8320

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD FX 8320

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8320

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 6 2 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score 9,317 vs 3,626.2 More than 2.5x better PassMark (Overclocked) score
More threads 8 vs 6 2 more threads
Slightly better PassMark score 8,183 vs 7,379 More than 10% better PassMark score
Slightly better cinebench r10 32Bit score 20,870 vs 18,021 More than 15% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
Front view of AMD FX 6350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 6350

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 3.9 GHz vs 3.5 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
More l3 cache per core 1.33 MB/core vs 1 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core
Slightly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,511 vs 1,402 Around 10% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per dollar 7.47 pt/$ vs 6.84 pt/$ Around 10% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of FX 8320 vs 6350

GeekBench (32-bit)

FX 8320
9,872
FX 6350
8,234

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

FX 8320
6,200
FX 6350
6,620
FX 8320 FX 6350 @ community.futuremark.com

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

FX 8320
20,870
FX 6350
18,021
FX 8320 FX 6350 @ anandtech.com

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

FX 8320
3,987
FX 6350
4,302
FX 8320 FX 6350 @ anandtech.com

Passmark

FX 8320
8,183
FX 6350
7,379
FX 8320 FX 6350 @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

FX 8320
1,402
FX 6350
1,511

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

FX 8320  vs
6350 
Clock speed 3.5 GHz 3.9 GHz
Cores Octa core Hexa core
Socket type
AM3+
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
XOP
SSE3
FMA3
SSE2
FMA4
F16C
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 125W 125W
Annual home energy cost 30.11 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 109.5 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 6.57 pt/W 6.58 pt/W
Typical power consumption 101.56W 101.56W

details

FX 8320  vs
6350 
Threads 8 6
L2 cache 8 MB 6 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 1.33 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclock popularity 63 3
Overclocked clock speed 4.64 GHz 4.66 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.83 GHz 4.83 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 9,317 3,626.2
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.64 GHz 4.66 GHz
AMD FX 8320
Report a correction
AMD FX 6350
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus