0.4
Check Prices $146.99
0
Check Prices $42
Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game FX-8320E Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz
Cyberpunk 2077 10% 267%
Hitman 3 48% 393%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 48% 393%
Resident Evil 8 22% 307%
FIFA 21 3% 243%
Grand Theft Auto VI 80% 502%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 6% 255%
Genshin Impact 17% 177%
The Medium 88% 529%
Far Cry 6 73% 478%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD FX-8320E is massively better than the Intel Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The FX-8320E was released less than a year after the Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

The FX-8320E has 6 more cores than the Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz. With 8 cores, the FX-8320E is much less likely to struggle with the latest games, or bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them.

The FX-8320E has 6 more threads than the Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz. Both CPUs have one thread per physical core.

Multiple threads are useful for improving the performance of multi-threaded applications. Additional cores and their accompanying thread will always be beneficial for multi-threaded applications. Hyperthreading will be beneficial for applications optimized for it, but it may slow others down. For games, the number of threads is largely irrelevant, as long as you have at least 2 cores (preferably 4), and hyperthreading can sometimes even hit performance.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The FX-8320E and Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the FX-8320E has a 0.8 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the FX-8320E is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The FX-8320E has a 7680 KB bigger L2 cache than the Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz, which means that it, at worst, wins out in this area, and at best, will provide superior gaming performance and will work much better with high-end graphics cards.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz has a 60 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the FX-8320E, and was created with a 10 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameVisheraIvy Bridge
MoBo SocketSocket AM3+LGA 1155/Socket H2
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date01 Sep 201401 Sep 2013
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores8vs2
CPU Threads8vs2
Clock Speed3.2 GHzvs2.4 GHz
Turbo Frequency4 GHzvs-
Max TDP95 Wvs35 W
Lithography32 nmvs22 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs64 Bit
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size384 KBvs128 KB
L2 Cache Size8192 KBvs512 KB
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size8 MBvs2 MB
Memory Channels-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewFX-8320E is an energy efficient CPU based on the 32nm Piledriver architecture.

It offers 8 Physical Cores (8 Logical), initially clocked at 3.5GHz, which may go up to 4.0GHz and 8MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 95W.

Its rank and specifications are still predicted.
Celeron G1620T 2.4GHz is a budget CPU based on the 22nm Ivy Bridge micro-architecture with many of its features disabled, including Turbo Boost and Hyper Threading.
It offers 2 Cores, clocked at 2.4GHz and integrated graphics clocked at 650MHz (1.05GHz in Turbo Mode) and the memory controller supports DDR3-1333. It's expected to consume up to 35 Watt and offers 2MB of L3 Cache.
Its gaming performance is relatively average and on level with previous Sandy Bridge based dual-core CPUs (Core i3).