Core i7-875K vs FX-4320

Core i7-875K vs FX-4320 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-875K

4 / 8

3,177

+0.9%

Pentium Dual Core T2390

3,150

0.0%

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 i7-875K 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 i7-875K 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 i7-875K

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.0 vs 12.6 PassMark/$ ($353 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).

FX-4320

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $103 less on MSRP ($250 MSRP vs $353 MSRP).
✅Delivers 40.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.6 vs 9.0 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $353 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-875K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,150 vs 3,177).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-875K better than FX-4320?

Yes. Core i7-875K is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-875K is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.4% 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, Core i7-875K is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

Core i7-875K is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i7-875K comes in 41.2% more expensive on MSRP at $353 MSRP versus $250 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. FX-4320 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 40.0% better value on paper (12.6 vs 9.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3+.

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

FX-4320 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-875K vs FX-4320 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-875K

The Core i7-875K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Lynnfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1156. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,177 points. Launch price was $486.

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 i7-875K packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the FX-4320's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-875K versus 4.1 GHz on the FX-4320 — a 13% clock advantage for the FX-4320 (base: 2.93 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i7-875K uses the Lynnfield (2009−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the FX-4320 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-875K scores 3,177 against the FX-4320's 3,150 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i7-875K. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-875K vs 4096 kB on the FX-4320.

Feature	Core i7-875K	FX-4320
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.6 GHz	4.1 GHz+14%
Base Clock	2.93 GHz	4 GHz+37%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)+100%	4096 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Lynnfield (2009−2010)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	3,177	3,150

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-875K uses the LGA1156 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the FX-4320 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-875K	FX-4320
Socket	LGA1156	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Core i7-875K) / not specified (FX-4320). Primary use case: Core i7-875K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-875K	FX-4320
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-875K was priced at $353, while the FX-4320 came in at $250. On launch pricing ($353 vs $250), FX-4320 was $103 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-875K delivers 9.0 pts/$ vs 12.6 pts/$ for the FX-4320 — making the FX-4320 the 33.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-875K	FX-4320
MSRP	$353	$250-29%
Performance per Dollar	9.0	12.6+40%
Release Date	2010	2012

Search Core i7-875K 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.