CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 6500 vs 8320 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

7.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i5 6500 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 6500  based on its single-core performance and power consumption.

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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 6500

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 6500

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 52.81W vs 101.56W Around 50% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,951 vs 1,402 Around 40% 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
Higher Maximum operating temperature 71 °C vs 61.1 °C More than 15% higher Maximum operating temperature
Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 30.11 $/year Around 50% lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 109.5 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 8320

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8320

Report a correction
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
Much better performance per dollar 6.95 pt/$ vs 0.63 pt/$ More than 11x better performance per dollar
Higher turbo clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.6 GHz More than 10% higher turbo clock speed
Higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Slightly more l3 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Significantly better performance per watt 7.79 pt/W vs 3.9 pt/W Around 2x better performance per watt
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.56 GHz vs 3.77 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Slightly better PassMark score 8,183 vs 7,217 Around 15% better PassMark score
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.75 GHz vs 4.29 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 6500 vs FX 8320

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 6500
13,537
FX 8320
10,352

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 6500
4,233
FX 8320
2,066

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 6500
5,880 MB/s
FX 8320
2,320,000 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i5 6500
7,217
FX 8320
8,183

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i5 6500
1,951
FX 8320
1,402

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 6500  vs
FX 8320 
Clock speed 3.2 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.6 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Quad 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 65W 125W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 3.9 pt/W 7.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 101.56W

details

Core i5 6500  vs
FX 8320 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 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 - 71°C Unknown - 61.1°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.77 GHz 4.56 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.29 GHz 4.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.77 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-1600
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i5 6500
Report a correction
AMD FX 8320
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus