
Core i7-2600K

FX-8320
Core i7-2600K vs FX-8320 Performance Spectrum
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 i7-2600K vs FX-8320 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i7-2600K vs FX-8320: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i7-2600K
2011Why buy it
- ✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while FX-8320 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8320 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 17.3 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($317 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
FX-8320
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $148 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $317 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 87.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.4 vs 17.3 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $317 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (5,472 vs 5,484).
- ❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is FX-8320 better than Core i7-2600K?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i7-2600K vs FX-8320 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-2600K
The Core i7-2600K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,484 points. Launch price was $317.

FX-8320
The FX-8320 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 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,472 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Core i7-2600K packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the FX-8320 offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the FX-8320 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i7-2600K versus 4 GHz on the FX-8320 — a 5.1% clock advantage for the FX-8320 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i7-2600K uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the FX-8320 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2600K scores 5,484 against the FX-8320's 5,472 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i7-2600K. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 707 vs 458, a 42.7% lead for the Core i7-2600K that directly translates to higher frame rates.
| Feature | Core i7-2600K | FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 8 | 8 / 8+100% |
| Boost Clock | 3.8 GHz | 4 GHz+5% |
| Base Clock | 3.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz+3% |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 8192 kB+3100% |
| Process | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Vishera (2012−2015) |
| PassMark | 5,484 | 5,472 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 4,500 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 707+54% | 458 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,791 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-2600K uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the FX-8320 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-2600K versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320 — the FX-8320 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: P67,Z68,Z77,H67,H61,B75 (Core i7-2600K) and 970,990X,990FX (FX-8320).
| Feature | Core i7-2600K | FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1155 | AM3+ |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR3-1866+40% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | 32 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core i7-2600K) vs AMD-V (FX-8320). The Core i7-2600K includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the FX-8320 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2600K targets Gaming Desktop, FX-8320 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: Core i7-2600K rivals FX-8150; FX-8320 rivals Core i5-3570.
| Feature | Core i7-2600K | FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 3000 | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming Desktop | Productivity |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i7-2600K was priced at $317, while the FX-8320 came in at $169. On launch pricing ($317 vs $169), FX-8320 was $148 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-2600K delivers 17.3 pts/$ vs 32.4 pts/$ for the FX-8320 — making the FX-8320 the 60.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-2600K | FX-8320 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $317 | $169-47% |
| Performance per Dollar | 17.3 | 32.4+87% |
| Release Date | 2011 | 2012 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















