Test – AMD FX8320E – Conseil Config : Specs | CPU | Hashrate | Review | Config

Hi all!

After the test of the FX8370E (here) I will present its little brother the FX8320E to you! The “E” version processors are versions running at lower frequencies than the “normal” versions but also have a reduced TDP downwards, from 125Watts to 95Watts. The FX8370E is clocked at 3.3Ghz during heavy loads while and 4.3Ghz in turbo mode during reduced loads while the FX8320E is at 3.2Ghz and 4Ghz in turbo mode. Instead, see a small summary table:

The biggest difference between the 2 processors in version “E” is the price, going from 199.99 € for the FX8370E to 146.99 € for the FX8320E which should give it a performance / price ratio much more interesting than its big one. brother, that’s what we’re going to see!

The FX8320E therefore has the same characteristics as the other FX8xxx processors with the exception of the TDP and the base frequency, the memory supported is always DDR3 1866MHz (of course the lower frequencies will also work!) And the caches L2 and L3 remain at 8MB. There really isn’t much difference with its big brother the FX8370E as I said above, 100Mhz less at full load for $ 50 less.

At rest the FX8320E operates at a frequency of 1.4Ghz for a voltage of 0.872V (0.84V for the test copy of the FX8370E in my possession), let’s see what it gives with a heavy load:

At 100% load we fall on the base frequency of 3.2GHz for a voltage of 1.16V (1.12V for the test copy of the FX8370E in my possession), which means that without overclocking the processor will remain at this frequency during heavy loads.

The configurations

For the tests 2 machines are available, a machine based on an Intel processor and an AMD machine:

Intel:

• Processor: Intel Core i5 4670K
• Motherboard: Gigabyte Z87-UD5H TH
• Memory: Kingston HyperX 4 x 2 Go 1600Mhz
• Hard disk: WD Raptor 150 Go
• Food: Seasonic X650
• Graphic card: Sapphire 7950 Dual-X
• Drivers: Catalyst 14.9
• Operating system: Windows 8.1 64bits

AMD:

• Processor: AMD FX8320E & AMD FX8370E
• Motherboard: Asrock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer & MSI 970 Gaming
• Memory: Kingston HyperX 4 x 2 Go 1600Mhz
• Hard disk: WD Raptor 150 Go
• Food: Seasonic X650
• Graphic card: Sapphire 7950 Dual-X
• Drivers: Catalyst 14.9
• Operating system: Windows 8.1 64bits

The test protocol

In order to have results covering a wide range of applications, I chose the following benchmarks:

• Fritz Chess
• WinRAR 5.11 64bit: integrated benchmark
• Wprime 2.10: benchmark 32M
• Cinebench R15: benchmark 1 thread et Multhread
• Handbrake: encoding of a 600MB Full HD avi file to mkv
• Unigine Heaven 4.0
• 3DMark Fire Strike Physics
• Year 2070: maximum quality, FPS were calculated under FRAPS by loading a save and performing a series of pre-recorded actions.
• Crysis 3: maximum quality, FPS were calculated under FRAPS by loading a save and performing a series of pre-recorded actions.
• Bioshock Infinite: maximum quality, integrated benchmark
• Tomb Raider: maximum quality, integrated benchmark

Note that the games run at 1920 x 1080, which is the current “standard”.

Performances Applications

How we can see the performance of the FX8320E is very close to the FX8370E especially when the applications take advantage of all hearts. It always remains behind the Core i5 except under Winrar, but the FX8320E defends itself very well especially compared to its price! In practice there will be almost no difference between the FX8370E and the FX8320E.

3D Performances and Games

Let’s start with the pure benchmarks, under Unigine Heaven and 3DMark Fire Strike the 3 processors are neck and neck and despite a very slight lead from the Core i5 4670K I can declare the 3 processors tied!
In the 4 games tested on the other hand there are 2 scenarios, the games having a strong tendency to need a lot of computing power like Anno 2070 and Crysis 3 and the games which rather require graphic power like Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite. Under Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite the 3 processors are very similar and all three offer equivalent performance, the limitation will therefore be at the level of the graphics card, on the other hand under Anno 2070 and Crysis 3 there the AMD processors cannot fight and s ‘unfortunately tilt very clearly against the core i5 4670K with 16FPS less under Anno and 10FPS less under Crysis 3 (for the FX8320E).
Once again the results of the 2 AMD processors are extremely close, there will be no difference in use.

Consumption

In terms of consumption at rest and with 76 Watts the 2 AMD processors are equal, in load the FX8320E manages to scratch 9 Watts on the FX8370E, that’s already won! The Core i5 4670K here is once again first with 9 Watts less at rest and respectively 31 Watts and 40 Watts less than the FX8720E and FX8370E.

The FX8320E is a low consumption processor compared to the rest of the FX8xxx range from AMD, the purchase of this type of processor is therefore generally motivated by a desire to lower the overall consumption of the machine if not as much to turn to a version 125 Watts (like the FX8370 for example) which will be more efficient. Despite everything, a processor test cannot be finished without seeing what the little one has in the stomach, so let’s go!

The overclocking potential is once again very good on the small FX8320E, compared to its big brother the FX8370E which managed to climb to 4.8Ghz stably (for the test copy) the FX8320E is doing very well. well with 4.7Ghz, as much to say that the potential is more or less identical!
The voltage however had to be increased to 1.46V which is not really recommended for 24/24 use, 4.4Ghz or 4.5Ghz will certainly be much more suitable.

Overclocking Applications

As we can see the gains are rather substantial with the overclocking applied especially when the applications use all the cores, in fact the gain is less when a single core is used because the FX8330E operates at 4GHz as standard.

3D overclocking and games

In games the result once again depends on the predominance of needing processor or graphics power, under Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite the gains are almost zero but on the other hand under 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, Anno 2070 and Crysis the gains are really substantial . We go from 6109 to 8732 (+ 43%) under 3DMark Fire Strike Physics, from 34 to 41 FPS (+ 20%) under Anno2070 and from 30 to 37 FPS under Crysis 3 (+ 23%), the results obtained thanks to the overclocking are therefore quite excellent!

Overclocking Consumption

This overclocking is necessarily nothing trivial in terms of consumption because the configuration goes from 171 Watts to the original socket with only the processor in charge at 347 Watts! Suffice to say that the small FX8320E is hungry for Watts once overclocked.

Here we are at the end of this test, what about the FX8320E from AMD?
AMD has decided to release an 8-core processor with reduced power consumption compared to the classic 125 Watts, with a TDP of 95 Watts the supported frequencies take a hit and go from 3.5GHz for the classic FX8320 to 3.2GHz for the FX8320E. After testing the FX8370E clocked at 3.3Ghz the performance is ultimately very similar, in application it is able to titillate the Intel Core i5 4670K during heavy multithreaded loads but is no match when a single core is in charge . As far as games are concerned, the FX8320E lags behind when it comes to demanding a lot of processor power (anno 2070, Crysis3 ..) but is sufficient to maintain a perfectly acceptable fluidity when it comes to games using power. graphic above all.
Regarding overclocking, and even if this is not really the goal for a processor which is particularly studied for a measured consumption, the FX8320E is doing almost as well as its big brother with a maximum frequency from 3.2 Ghz for all hearts at 4.7Ghz (4.8Ghz for the FX8370E)! Consumption is also greatly affected by going from 171Watts in charge to 347Watts, which is quite enormous.

The price of $ 146.99 puts it up against the FX8370E ($ 199.99 I remind you) and makes it much more interesting, if for some reason Intel processors are not for you. and you are looking for a processor with decent raw power and in-game performance at a reasonable price then the FX8320E may be a good alternative.

A big thank you to Yann from Text100 who allowed me to do this test.

Where can I find the AMD FX8320E?

[phpzon asin= »B00MUTWEM6″ country= »FR » trackingid= »conseil-config-21″ merchantid= »Amazon » templatename= »conseil »]