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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 6100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 6100

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 41.44W vs 101.56W 2.5x lower typical power consumption
Higher clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 3.5 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 2,106 vs 1,402 More than 50% better PassMark (Single core) score
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Newer Jul, 2015 vs Oct, 2012 Release date over 2 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year vs 30.11 $/year 2.5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year vs 109.5 $/year 2.5x lower annual commercial energy cost
Higher Maximum operating temperature 65 °C vs 61.1 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Front view of AMD FX 8320

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8320

Report a correction
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Much better performance per dollar 6.95 pt/$ vs 1.84 pt/$ More than 3.8x better performance per dollar
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 3 MB Around 2.8x 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
Significantly better performance per watt 7.79 pt/W vs 4.51 pt/W Around 75% better performance per watt
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better PassMark score 8,183 vs 5,478 Around 50% better PassMark score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.56 GHz vs 4.25 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.75 GHz vs 4.39 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 6100 vs FX 8320

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i3 6100
5,478
FX 8320
8,183

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i3 6100
2,106
FX 8320
1,402

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 6100  vs
FX 8320 
Clock speed 3.7 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 51W 125W
Annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 4.51 pt/W 7.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 41.44W 101.56W

details

Core i3 6100  vs
FX 8320 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L3 cache 3 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 65°C Unknown - 61.1°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.25 GHz 4.56 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.39 GHz 4.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.25 GHz 4.56 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 530 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC Yes Yes
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 6100
Report a correction
AMD FX 8320
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 4 comments.
nope grinch came and stole it
green and crinkly? are you talking about Nvidia? XD
I smell something fishy here. I was thinking the same thing. Maybe something green and crinkly had something to do with it.
How is there no actual performance comparison? Of course the I-3 Wins in Single Core processing, Its Intel and it's three years newer, but what about actual computing power?
comments powered by Disqus