Winner
Intel Core i3 4340
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 4340 based on its .
See full details Intel Core i3 4340 vs AMD FX 8320 |
Released July, 2013
Intel Core i3 4340
- 3.6 GHz
- Dual core
7.9 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i3 4340
 | Is hyperthreaded Yes | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms | | Much lower typical power consumption 43.88W |
VS
Released October, 2012
AMD FX 8320
- 3.5 GHz
- Octa core
- Unlocked
7.9 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD FX 8320
| | Much more l2 cache 8 MB | | Is unlocked Yes |
| | Significantly more l3 cache 8 MB | | More cores 8 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4340 vs 8320
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit) | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Passmark (Single Core) | |
Overclocking | |
How much speed can you get out of the processor? | |
| Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 1 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value | |
 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Intel Core i3 4340CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Is hyperthreaded | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 43.88W | vs | 101.56W | 2.3x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 2,109 | vs | 1,402 | More than 50% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Much more l3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 2x more l3 cache per core | |||
| Significantly better performance per watt | 15.87 pt/W | vs | 7 pt/W | More than 2.2x better performance per watt | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 47.3 $/year | vs | 109.5 $/year | 2.3x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 13.01 $/year | vs | 30.11 $/year | 2.3x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Marginally newer | Jul, 2013 | vs | Oct, 2012 | Release date 8 months later | |||
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 8 MB | vs | 1 MB | 8x 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 | |||
| Significantly more l3 cache | 8 MB | vs | 4 MB | 2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
| More cores | 8 | vs | 2 | 6 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
| More threads | 8 | vs | 4 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much better PassMark (Overclocked) score | 9,317 | vs | 4,161.4 | Around 2.2x better PassMark (Overclocked) score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 8,183 | vs | 5,190 | Around 60% better PassMark score | |||
| Significantly more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.67 GHz | vs | 3.71 GHz | More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better geekbench (32-bit) score | 9,964 | vs | 7,026 | More than 40% better geekbench (32-bit) score | |||
| Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.88 GHz | vs | 3.79 GHz | Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 4340 vs FX 8320
GeekBench (32-bit)
GeekBench
Passmark
Passmark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i3 4340 | vs | FX 8320 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Octa core | |
| Is unlocked | No | Yes | |
| Is hyperthreaded | Yes | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AVX | |||
| XOP | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| FMA3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| F16C | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AVX 2.0 | |||
| AES | |||
| SSE Family | |||
| FMA | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| GPU | GPU | None | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics 4600 | N/A | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | N/A | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | N/A | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,150 MHz | N/A | |
details | Core i3 4340 | vs | FX 8320 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 8 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 8 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.71 GHz | 4.67 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.79 GHz | 4.88 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 4,161.4 | 9,317 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.71 GHz | 4.67 GHz | |
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 | 15.87 pt/W | 7 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 43.88W | 101.56W | |
 Intel Core i3 4340  Report a correction |  AMD FX 8320 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $160 | $200 | |
| 8320 vs 8350 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | $120 | |
| 8320 vs 6300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | $230 | |
| 8320 vs 3570K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | $240 | |
| 8320 vs 4670K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | $195 | |
| 8320 vs 4440 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | $200 | |
| 8320 vs 4570 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $160 | ||
| 8320 vs 6350 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $340 | ||
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
| | VS | |
| $240 | $340 | |
| 4670K vs 4770K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $340 | $332 | |
| 4770K vs 4820k | ||
| | VS | |
| $200 | $240 | |
| 8350 vs 4670K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | $393 | |
| 4200U vs 4500U | ||
 | VS | |
| $225 | $281 | |
| 3230M vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $378 | $378 | |
| 4700HQ vs 4700MQ | ||
