FX-8320 vs Xeon E3-1226 v3

FX-8320 vs Xeon E3-1226 v3 Performance Spectrum

FX-8320

8 / 8

5,472

0.0%

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

Xeon E3-1226 v3

4 / 4

5,529

+1.0%

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.

FX-8320 vs Xeon E3-1226 v3 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.

FX-8320 vs Xeon E3-1226 v3: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

FX-8320

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +17.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E3-1226 v3.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (5,472 vs 5,529).
❌Launch MSRP is still $169 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1226 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌48.8% higher power demand at 125W vs 84W.

Xeon E3-1226 v3

2014

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 84W instead of 125W, a 41W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8320 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike FX-8320.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1226 v3 better than FX-8320?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1226 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while FX-8320 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E3-1226 v3 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Xeon E3-1226 v3 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E3-1226 v3 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $169 MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. FX-8320 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (32.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon E3-1226 v3 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 8/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

FX-8320 vs Xeon E3-1226 v3 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Xeon E3-1226 v3

The Xeon E3-1226 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell-WS (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 84 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,529 points. Launch price was $213.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-8320 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E3-1226 v3 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-8320 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the FX-8320 versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon E3-1226 v3 — a 7.8% clock advantage for the FX-8320 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The FX-8320 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E3-1226 v3 uses Haswell-WS (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the FX-8320 scores 5,472 against the Xeon E3-1226 v3's 5,529 — a 1% lead for the Xeon E3-1226 v3.

Feature	FX-8320	Xeon E3-1226 v3
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+100%	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4 GHz+8%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+6%	3.3 GHz
L3 Cache	—	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	8192 kB+3100%	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Vishera (2012−2015)	Haswell-WS (2013−2014)
PassMark	5,472	5,529+1%
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 Xeon E3-1226 v3 uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-8320	Xeon E3-1226 v3
Socket	AM3+	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (FX-8320) / not specified (Xeon E3-1226 v3). Primary use case: FX-8320 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: FX-8320 rivals Core i5-3570.