EPYC 8224PN vs FX-8320

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1520not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Siena (2023)
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)18 September 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,015

Detailed specifications

FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads848
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3 GHz
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache8192 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm5 nm
Die size315 mm22x 73 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data85 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million17,750 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN 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
SocketAM3+SP6
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN.

PCIe versionn/a5.0
PCI Express lanesno data96

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 18 September 2023
Physical cores 8 24
Threads 8 48
Chip lithography 32 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 120 Watt

EPYC 8224PN has an age advantage of 10 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, a 540% more advanced lithography process, and 4.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-8320 is a desktop processor while EPYC 8224PN is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8320 and EPYC 8224PN, 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.


AMD FX-8320
FX-8320
AMD EPYC 8224PN
EPYC 8224PN

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.


4.2 1340 votes

Rate FX-8320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 8224PN on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8320 or EPYC 8224PN, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.