AMD FX-4320 vs Intel Pentium Gold G6405T Comparison

The AMD FX-4320 and Intel Pentium Gold G6405T occupy nearly the same position in the benchmark database, with average scores of 921 and 915 respectively. Both processors sit in the 24th to 25th percentile of all CPUs, making them direct competitors in the entry-level desktop space. The data reveals a remarkably tight race, with the FX-4320 taking all five head-to-head benchmark wins, though by margins so slim they approach statistical noise.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD FX-4320 wins every single benchmark comparison, but the margins are consistently under one percent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the FX-4320 scores 269 against the Pentium Gold’s 267, a delta of just 0.7%. That translates to a two-point difference — a gap that would disappear in any real-world run-to-run variance.

Cinebench R20 multicore tells the same story. The FX-4320 posts 1124 while the Pentium Gold manages 1116, again a 0.7% lead. The single-core results are even closer: 158 versus 157 in R20 single-core (0.6% delta), and 378 versus 375 in R23 single-core (0.8% delta). The largest margin across all five tests is the R23 multicore result, where the FX-4320’s 2677 edges out the Pentium Gold’s 2658 by 0.7%.

What is striking is not that the AMD chip wins, but how consistent the pattern is. Every test shows the same sub-one-percent advantage. The FX-4320’s average benchmark score of 921 sits just 0.7% above the Pentium Gold’s 915, mirroring the head-to-head deltas. Neither processor ever breaks away from the other; they trade blows within a narrow band of performance that the benchmarks simply cannot separate with confidence.

The nearest rivals for each chip underscore how crowded this performance tier is. The FX-4320’s closest competitor is the AMD PRO A10-9700E at 919 points (0.2% delta), while the Pentium Gold’s nearest neighbor is the Intel Xeon W3540 at 913 (0.3% delta). Both chips sit within half a percent of the AMD Athlon Silver 3050U and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G, meaning a handful of points separates a cluster of five different processors.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the head-to-head data, the AMD FX-4320 wins every category tested. It holds a 0.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore, a 0.7% lead in R20 multicore, a 0.6% lead in R20 single-core, a 0.7% lead in R23 multicore, and a 0.8% lead in R23 single-core. That is five wins out of five possible benchmarks, with zero wins for the Intel part.

However, the practical significance of these wins is minimal. A 0.6% to 0.8% advantage in a synthetic rendering workload like Cinebench does not indicate a meaningful real-world performance gap. The FX-4320’s wins are consistent, but they are also the kind of margins that would be invisible in everyday use — the difference between a score of 158 and 157 in single-core performance is within the margin of error for most benchmarking runs.

The Pentium Gold G6405T does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. Its best relative showing is in R20 single-core, where it trails by just 0.6%. The FX-4320’s largest advantage comes in R23 single-core at 0.8%, but even that is a three-point gap on a 378-point scale. Neither processor demonstrates a clear strength in any particular workload; they are effectively tied across the board.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The AMD FX-4320 uses the Piledriver architecture on the Vishera codename, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 1,200 million transistors into a 315 mm² die. The Intel Pentium Gold G6405T uses the Comet Lake architecture on the Comet Lake-R codename, manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process. Intel does not report transistor count or die size for this part.

Core configuration differs sharply. The FX-4320 has four physical cores and four threads, while the Pentium Gold has two cores and four threads via Hyper-Threading. The AMD chip runs at a base clock of 4.00 GHz with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, whereas the Pentium Gold has a fixed base clock of 3.50 GHz with no boost capability. The FX-4320 also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Pentium Gold’s multiplier is locked.

Cache layouts reflect the different architectures. The FX-4320 provides 192 KB of L1 cache, 4 MB of L2 cache, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Pentium Gold offers 64 KB of L1 per core (128 KB total for two cores), 256 KB of L2 per core (512 KB total), and 4 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip’s larger L2 cache is a product of its older, higher-power design; the Intel part’s smaller per-core caches are offset by its more modern process node.

Memory support and platform features diverge significantly. The FX-4320 uses DDR3 memory with dual-channel support and a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Pentium Gold uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and a higher memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The AMD chip runs on PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel part supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. The FX-4320 has no integrated graphics, relying on a chipset feature on certain motherboards; the Pentium Gold includes Intel UHD Graphics 610.

Power draw tells a dramatic story. The FX-4320 has a 95 W TDP, while the Pentium Gold is rated at just 35 W. That is a 60 W difference — the Intel part uses roughly one-third the power of the AMD chip while delivering essentially identical benchmark scores. The FX-4320 uses the AMD Socket AM3+, while the Pentium Gold fits Intel Socket 1200.

The Verdict

The benchmark data says these processors are effectively equivalent in raw performance. The AMD FX-4320 wins all five head-to-head tests, but the margins range from 0.6% to 0.8%, and the average scores differ by only six points out of roughly 920. No reasonable interpretation of these numbers supports choosing one over the other based on speed alone.

The differentiators are elsewhere. The Pentium Gold G6405T consumes 35 W versus the FX-4320’s 95 W, making it the far more efficient choice for compact or power-constrained builds. It also brings modern platform features: DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe Gen 3, and integrated UHD Graphics 610. The FX-4320 counters with four physical cores, an unlocked multiplier, and a higher 4.00 GHz base clock, but it requires DDR3 and PCIe Gen 2, and it needs a discrete GPU.

For a new system build, the Pentium Gold is the logical pick from the data: it matches the FX-4320’s performance within a fraction of a percent while using less than half the power and offering newer memory and I/O standards. For an existing AM3+ platform owner looking to squeeze out a final upgrade, the FX-4320’s unlocked multiplier and four physical cores might justify staying put. But the benchmarks themselves do not separate the two — the decision rests entirely on platform, power, and feature preferences.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-4320 has an average benchmark score of 921, compared to the Intel Pentium Gold G6405T’s 915. That is a 0.7% difference.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmarks does each processor win?

A: The AMD FX-4320 wins all five head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Pentium Gold G6405T wins zero.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any single test?

A: The largest delta is 0.8% in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the FX-4320 scores 378 against the Pentium Gold’s 375.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two processors?

A: The AMD FX-4320 has a TDP of 95 W, while the Intel Pentium Gold G6405T has a TDP of 35 W. The Intel part consumes 60 W less.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Pentium Gold G6405T includes UHD Graphics 610. The AMD FX-4320 has no integrated graphics, relying on a chipset feature on certain motherboards.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Pentium Gold G6405T supports DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The AMD FX-4320 supports DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FX-4320 | Intel Pentium Gold G6405T |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | None |

| TDP | 95 W | 35 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Piledriver | Comet Lake |

| Codename | Vishera | Comet Lake-R |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 1,200 million | Not reported |

| Die Size | 315 mm² | Not reported |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Chipset feature | UHD Graphics 610 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2012-10-22 | 2021-03-15 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | FD4320WMW4KHK | SRH41 |

| Launch MSRP | Not available | $64 |