Core i3-4170T vs FX-4320

Core i3-4170T vs FX-4320 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4170T

2 / 4

3,133

0.0%

3,150

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-4170T vs FX-4320 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-4170T vs FX-4320: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-4170T

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $133 less on MSRP ($117 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 26.8 vs 12.6 PassMark/$ ($117 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 95W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4400, while FX-4320 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,133 vs 3,150).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).

FX-4320

2012

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.6 vs 26.8 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $117 MSRP).
❌171.4% higher power demand at 95W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4170T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i3-4170T.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4320 better than Core i3-4170T?

Yes. FX-4320 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.5% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-4320 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-4320 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

FX-4320 is still the much better call for a fresh build. FX-4320 comes in 113.7% more expensive on MSRP at $250 MSRP versus $117 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-4170T only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2015 platform. Even with 112.5% better value on paper (26.8 vs 12.6 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1150.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-4170T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4170T vs FX-4320 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-4170T

The Core i3-4170T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 March 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333/1600, DDR3L-1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,133 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-4320

The FX-4320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4096 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 3,150 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4170T packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4320 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4320 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-4170T versus 4.1 GHz on the FX-4320 — a 24.7% clock advantage for the FX-4320 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i3-4170T uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-4320 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4170T scores 3,133 against the FX-4320's 3,150 — a 0.5% lead for the FX-4320. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4170T vs 4096 kB on the FX-4320.

Feature	Core i3-4170T	FX-4320
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	4.1 GHz+28%
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	4 GHz+25%
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	4096 kB+33%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	3,133	3,150
Geekbench 6 Single	800	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,600	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4170T uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4320 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4170T	FX-4320
Socket	LGA1150	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4170T) / not specified (FX-4320). The Core i3-4170T includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4400), while the FX-4320 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4170T targets Low Power Desktop.

Feature	Core i3-4170T	FX-4320
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics 4400	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Low Power Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-4170T was priced at $117, while the FX-4320 came in at $250. On launch pricing ($117 vs $250), Core i3-4170T was $133 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-4170T delivers 26.8 pts/$ vs 12.6 pts/$ for the FX-4320 — making the Core i3-4170T the 72% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-4170T	FX-4320
MSRP	$117-53%	$250
Performance per Dollar	26.8+113%	12.6
Release Date	2015	2012

Search Core i3-4170T on Amazon

Search FX-4320 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.