Testseek.co.uk have collected 57 expert reviews of the AMD FX-8320 3.5Ghz Socket AM3 Plus and the average rating is 83%. Scroll down and see all reviews for AMD FX-8320 3.5Ghz Socket AM3 Plus.
(83%)
57 Reviews
Average score from experts who have reviewed this product.
Abstract: These days there are basically two different groups of customers who demand lots of processing power: content creators and gamers, while this 2D performance comparison is targeting content creators. After having had a look at the following pages you'll ha...
DefaultFirst of all we're going to have a closer look at performance differences with standard clock speeds From our overall performance rating we see that the Core i56600K is on average 1439 % quicker than the AMD FX8320 If we start searching for the ben...
Abstract: On June 4 Intel is launching its next generation Core processors, also called Haswell. That means it's the perfect opportunity for us to retest all current processors and a number of older ones with a completely new test configuration. It will not only ...
Abstract: The first generation processors based on AMD's Bulldozer architecture did not meet expectations, so AMD is making a second attempt today, with FX 2.0 or Vishera. The Piledriver cores are a refinement and further development of Bulldozer, that are suppos...
Abstract: The launch of Socket AM3+ processors with Piledriver microarchitecture inspired many AMD fans. However, until recently we only based our opinion on the results obtained from the top model in the new AMD FX family. Today we are going to make up for this omission and carry out a detailed performance analysis of all Vishera processors with eight, six and four cores....
Abstract: AMD FX 8350 - 8320 - 6300 and 4300 processors performance analyzedAMD released the FX series Vishera - Piledriver based processor. And though everybody has been focusing on that most high-end AMD FX 8350 processor, another three processors have been relea...
Abstract: Last year's launch of AMD's FX processors was honestly disappointing. The Bulldozer CPU cores that were bundled into each Zambezi chip were hardly power efficient and in many areas couldn't significantly outperform AMD's previous generation platform. Look...
Progression de performances, Baisse de la consommation, OC facile, Prix
Pas toujours au Top, Conso encore trop importante
Lors de notre test du FX-8350, nous trouvions que ce processeur AMD était une alternative à l'offre Intel, du moins sur le segment du milieu de gamme. Avec le 8320, et un tarif de seulement 158 €, nous serions tenté de dire que ce processeur est peut-ê...
Abstract: L'architecture Bulldozer d'AMD n'a pas vraiment convaincu les utilisateurs. Au-delà de l'écart avec son concurrent Intel, cette nouvelle plateforme prometteuse sur le papier a montré quelques faiblesses. Mais aujourd'hui, avec Vishera Piledriver la marque...
Performances dans les applications tirant parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs, Fonction Turbo qui permet de limiter la casse sur les applications ne tirant pas parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs, Les cartes mères AM+ d'ancienne génération sont co
Consommation électrique, Performances dans les applications ne tirant pas parti de la présence de plusieurs cœurs, Performances dans les jeux vidéo toujours en retrait par rapport à la concurrence
AMD réussit à augmenter les performances de ses processeurs haut de gamme, c’est un fait, surtout sur les applications multi-threadées. En revanche, les lacunes de la génération précédente sont toujours présentes et il serait temps que la société se pe...
