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 Itanium 9320

Reasons to consider the
Intel Itanium 9320

Report a correction
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 8 vs 1 7 supports more CPUs in SMP configuration
More l3 cache 16 MB vs 8 MB 2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Much more l3 cache per core 4 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 4x more l3 cache per core
Front view of AMD FX 8320

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8320

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 2 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher turbo clock speed 4 GHz vs 1.47 GHz Around 2.8x higher turbo clock speed
Much higher clock speed 3.5 GHz vs 1.33 GHz Around 2.8x higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly lower typical power consumption 101.56W vs 125.94W Around 20% lower typical power consumption
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Newer Oct, 2012 vs Feb, 2010 Release date over 2 years later
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 30.11 $/year vs 37.34 $/year Around 20% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 109.5 $/year vs 135.78 $/year Around 20% lower annual commercial energy cost

Features Key features of the Itanium 9320  vs FX 8320 

clock speed

Itanium 9320
1.33 GHz
FX 8320
3.5 GHz

turbo clock speed

Itanium 9320
1.47 GHz
FX 8320
4 GHz

L2 cache

FX 8320
8 MB

L3 cache

Itanium 9320
16 MB
FX 8320
8 MB

TDP

FX 8320
125W

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Itanium 9320  vs
FX 8320 
Clock speed 1.33 GHz 3.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 1.47 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 1248
AM3+

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 155W 125W
Annual home energy cost 37.34 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 135.78 $/year 109.5 $/year
Typical power consumption 125.94W 101.56W

bus

Clock speed 2,400 MHz 2,600 MHz

details

Itanium 9320  vs
FX 8320 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L2 cache 2 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 16 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 4 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 8 1

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A
Intel Itanium 9320
Report a correction
AMD FX 8320
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus