FX-4320 vs i7-6950X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-6950X
2016
10 cores / 20 threads, 140 Watt
10.92
+452%
FX-4320
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.98

Core i7-6950X outperforms FX-4320 by a whopping 452% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-6950X and FX-4320 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking7081925
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.82no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i7 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency7.381.97
Architecture codenameBroadwell-E (2016)Vishera (2012−2015)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)23 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,723no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-6950X and FX-4320 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores10 (Deca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads204
Base clock speed3 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus rate9.6 GT/s / QPIno data
L1 cache32K (per core)192 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)4096 KB
L3 cache25 MB (shared)4096 KB
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size246 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,800 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-6950X and FX-4320 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCLGA2011AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-6950X and FX-4320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Smart Response+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data

Security technologies

Core i7-6950X and FX-4320 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-6950X and FX-4320 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-6950X and FX-4320. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3-1866
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-6950X and FX-4320.

PCIe version3.0Not Listed
PCI Express lanes40no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-6950X 10.92
+452%
FX-4320 1.98

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i7-6950X 17353
+451%
FX-4320 3150

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.92 1.98
Recency 31 May 2016 23 October 2012
Physical cores 10 4
Threads 20 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 95 Watt

i7-6950X has a 451.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 150% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

FX-4320, on the other hand, has 47.4% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-6950X is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4320 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-6950X and FX-4320, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-6950X
Core i7-6950X
AMD FX-4320
FX-4320

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 253 votes

Rate Core i7-6950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 135 votes

Rate FX-4320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-6950X or FX-4320, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.