Core i7-4700EQ vs FX-8320

Core i7-4700EQ vs FX-8320 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-4700EQ

4 / 8

5,417

0.0%

5,472

+1.0%

Athlon X4 830

Athlon X4 880K

Ryzen Embedded R1606G

FX-8140

Ryzen 7 5700

Ryzen AI Max PRO 390

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

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 i7-4700EQ 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.

Core i7-4700EQ 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 i7-4700EQ

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 47W instead of 125W, a 78W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, 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 (5,417 vs 5,472).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.3 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-8320.

FX-8320

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $209 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Delivers 125.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.4 vs 14.3 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-4700EQ.

Trade-offs

❌166% higher power demand at 125W vs 47W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-4700EQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-8320 better than Core i7-4700EQ?

Yes. FX-8320 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 12.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-8320 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 12.3% 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-8320 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

FX-8320 is the better buy right now. FX-8320 comes in $209 cheaper on MSRP at $169 MSRP versus $378 MSRP, and it still gives you a 12.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 125.9% better value on MSRP (32.4 vs 14.3 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i7-4700EQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-4700EQ vs FX-8320 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-4700EQ

The Core i7-4700EQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 May 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1364. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,417 points. Launch price was $149.

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 i7-4700EQ packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the FX-8320 offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the FX-8320 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Core i7-4700EQ versus 4 GHz on the FX-8320 — a 16.2% clock advantage for the FX-8320 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i7-4700EQ uses the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-8320 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4700EQ scores 5,417 against the FX-8320's 5,472 — a 1% lead for the FX-8320.

Feature	Core i7-4700EQ	FX-8320
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	8 / 8+100%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	4 GHz+18%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	3.5 GHz+46%
L3 Cache	8192 kB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	8192 kB+3100%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Crystalwell (2013−2014)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	5,417	5,472+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	4,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	458
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,791

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4700EQ uses the BGA1364 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-8320 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Core i7-4700EQ versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320 — the FX-8320 supports 16.6% 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.

Feature	Core i7-4700EQ	FX-8320
Socket	BGA1364	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	DDR3-1866+17%
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the FX-8320 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-4700EQ) vs AMD-V (FX-8320). The Core i7-4700EQ includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the FX-8320 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-4700EQ targets Mobile, FX-8320 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: FX-8320 rivals Core i5-3570.

Feature	Core i7-4700EQ	FX-8320
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 4600	—
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Mobile	Productivity

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-4700EQ was priced at $378, while the FX-8320 came in at $169. On launch pricing ($378 vs $169), FX-8320 was $209 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-4700EQ delivers 14.3 pts/$ vs 32.4 pts/$ for the FX-8320 — making the FX-8320 the 77.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-4700EQ	FX-8320
MSRP	$378	$169-55%
Performance per Dollar	14.3	32.4+127%
Release Date	2013	2012

Search Core i7-4700EQ on Amazon

Search FX-8320 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.