FX-8320 vs Atom x7425E
FX-8320
Atom x7425E
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FX-8320 is positioned at rank 566 and the Atom x7425E is on rank 213, so the Atom x7425E offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FX-8320
Performance Per Dollar Atom x7425E
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | FX-8320 | Atom x7425E |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Vishera (2012−2015) / 32 nm) | ✨ Modern (Gracemont (2023) / 10 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | FX-8320 | Atom x7425E |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FX-8320 and Atom x7425E
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.
Atom x7425E
The Atom x7425E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Gracemont (2023) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 5,427 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The FX-8320 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Atom x7425E offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-8320 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the FX-8320 versus 3.4 GHz on the Atom x7425E — a 16.2% clock advantage for the FX-8320 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The FX-8320 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Atom x7425E uses Gracemont (2023) (10 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8320 scores 5,472 against the Atom x7425E's 5,427 — a 0.8% lead for the FX-8320.
| Feature | FX-8320 | Atom x7425E |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8+100% | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 4 GHz+18% | 3.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+133% | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 6 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 8192 kB+300% | 2 MB (total) |
| Process | 32 nm | 10 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Vishera (2012−2015) | Gracemont (2023) |
| PassMark | 5,472 | 5,427 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 4,500 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 458 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,791 | — |
Memory & Platform
The FX-8320 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Atom x7425E uses FCBGA1744 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320 versus DDR5-4800 on the Atom x7425E — the Atom x7425E supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The FX-8320 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (FX-8320) vs 1 (Atom x7425E). PCIe lanes: 16 (FX-8320) vs 9 (Atom x7425E) — the FX-8320 offers 7 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 970,990X,990FX (FX-8320) and Intel BGA1264 (Atom x7425E).
| Feature | FX-8320 | Atom x7425E |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3+ | FCBGA1744 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 4.0+100% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1866 | DDR5-4800+67% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+100% | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16+78% | 9 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (FX-8320) / not specified (Atom x7425E). The Atom x7425E includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics (24EU)), while the FX-8320 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: FX-8320 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: FX-8320 rivals Core i5-3570.
| Feature | FX-8320 | Atom x7425E |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel UHD Graphics (24EU) |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Productivity | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on FX-8320 and Atom x7425E
