CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4130 vs 8320 among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Core i3 4130
6.0
FX 8320
9.1
Core i5 2400
7.8
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Core i3 4130
9.7
FX 8320
6.8
Core i5 2400
8.3
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Core i3 4130
1.1
FX 8320
0.0
Core i5 2400
n.d.
Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Core i3 4130
6.7
FX 8320
0.0
Core i5 2400
n.d.
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Core i3 4130
7.4
FX 8320
5.0
Core i5 2400
6.7
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Core i3 4130
7.6
FX 8320
5.6
Core i5 2400
6.3
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more
7.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets
Core i3 4130
7.7
FX 8320
5.1
Core i5 2400
8.5

Winner
AMD FX 8320 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 8320  based on its overclocking.

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

Intel Core i3 4130

Front view of Intel Core i3 4130
Front view of AMD FX 8320

AMD FX 8320

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 4130

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 4130

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 43.88W vs 101.56W 2.3x lower typical power consumption
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 72 °C vs 61.1 °C Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year vs 109.5 $/year 2.3x lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year vs 30.11 $/year 2.3x lower annual home energy cost
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Oct, 2012 Release date 8 months later
Front view of AMD FX 8320

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8320

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 0.5 MB 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
More cores 8 vs 2 6 more cores; run more applications at once
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.56 GHz vs 3.47 GHz More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.4 GHz Around 5% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.75 GHz vs 3.58 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 4130 vs FX 8320

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
6,330
FX 8320
10,352

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
2,982
FX 8320
2,066

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
3,840,000 MB/s
FX 8320
2,320,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
6,256
FX 8320
9,798

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 4130
6,772
FX 8320
10,594

GeekBench

Core i3 4130
6,772
FX 8320
11,631

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 4130
4,786
FX 8320
8,183

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 4130
1,963
FX 8320
1,402

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Core i3 4130  vs
FX 8320 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Octa core
Is unlocked No Yes

features
Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption
TDP 54W 125W
Annual home energy cost 13.01 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 47.3 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 13.06 pt/W 7.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 43.88W 101.56W

details

 Core i3 4130  vs
FX 8320 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 0.5 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72°C Unknown - 61.1°C

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 3.47 GHz 4.56 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.58 GHz 4.75 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 1,786.7 9,317
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.47 GHz 4.56 GHz

integrated graphics
GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD graphics 4400 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz N/A

memory controller
Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 4130
Report a correction
AMD FX 8320
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss