CPU Comparison

The AMD FX-8320E and AMD Ryzen 5 2500U occupy nearly identical spots in the aggregate benchmark standings, with average scores of 1059 and 1058 respectively, yet they represent two radically different eras of AMD design. The FX-8320E is a desktop part from the Piledriver generation, built on a 32 nm process, while the Ryzen 5 2500U is a mobile chip based on the Zen architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm node. Both CPUs land at the 29th percentile among all processors, and their nearest-rival lists are nearly interchangeable, the Intel Core i3-4350, Intel Core i3-4360, and Intel Core i7-2760QM appear around both. The data, however, reveals a stark split in workload behavior: the Ryzen 5 2500U dominates the available Geekbench tests, while the FX-8320E offers a different set of physical characteristics that matter for specific desktop use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 2500U wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the data, taking both Geekbench multicore and singlecore tests. In the multicore test, the 2500U scores 2635 against the FX-8320E’s 1681, a margin of 36.2 percent. In singlecore, the 2500U posts 851 versus 437, a 48.6 percent advantage. This makes the Ryzen 5 2500U the clear choice for any workload that relies on per-thread performance or modern instruction efficiency, including everyday productivity, web browsing, and lightly threaded applications. Its higher memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, supported by DDR4 memory, further bolsters tasks that stream data, such as media playback or general multitasking.

The FX-8320E, by contrast, wins no benchmark in the head-to-head set. Its wins are structural rather than numerical: it offers eight physical cores and eight threads, matching the 2500U’s thread count but with separate physical cores rather than simultaneous multithreading on four cores. For desktop users who value raw core count in legacy software that scales across physical cores, or who need a CPU with an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, the FX-8320E provides a platform advantage. The FX-8320E also supports DDR3 memory, which may be relevant for users upgrading an existing AM3+ system. It is end-of-life, but its desktop socket and unlocked multiplier give it a niche in older builds where the mobile-only 2500U cannot be installed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is generational. The FX-8320E uses the Piledriver architecture, codenamed Vishera, built on a 32 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 1,200 million transistors on a 315 mm² die. The Ryzen 5 2500U uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Raven Ridge, fabricated on a 14 nm process, also at GlobalFoundries, but packs 4,950 million transistors into a smaller 210 mm² die. The transistor density difference is enormous, the newer chip crams more than four times the transistors into a smaller area, which explains its efficiency gains.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The FX-8320E has a 384 KB L1 cache, an 8 MB L2 cache, and an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 5 2500U lists its caches per core: 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. With four cores, that translates to 384 KB L1 total, 2 MB L2 total, and 4 MB L3, meaning the FX-8320E has four times the L2 and twice the L3 capacity. However, the Zen design’s cache efficiency is dramatically better, as evidenced by the 2500U’s higher scores despite smaller aggregate caches.

Memory support diverges completely. The FX-8320E uses DDR3 with dual-channel access and a peak bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The Ryzen 5 2500U uses DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, a 28.4 percent improvement in theoretical throughput. PCIe support also differs: the FX-8320E is limited to Gen 2, while the 2500U offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The 2500U includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, whereas the FX-8320E relies on chipset-based graphics on certain motherboards. The FX-8320E has a 95 W TDP and an unlocked multiplier; the 2500U is a 15 W mobile part with a locked multiplier. The FX-8320E launched in September 2014 with an MSRP of $147, while the 2500U launched in October 2017 as an active mobile product.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench multicore test shows the Ryzen 5 2500U ahead by 954 points, scoring 2635 against the FX-8320E’s 1681. This is a 36.2 percent difference, and it is striking because the FX-8320E has double the physical cores. The Zen architecture’s superior instruction per clock (IPC) allows four cores with eight threads to outpace eight Piledriver cores. The data suggests that the FX-8320E’s high core count does not compensate for its older design in this modern benchmark.

The singlecore test is even more lopsided. The 2500U scores 851, while the FX-8320E manages only 437, a 48.6 percent deficit. This nearly two-to-one ratio highlights the core architectural efficiency gap. Single-threaded performance is critical for many real-world applications, and the FX-8320E’s Piledriver cores, running at a base clock of 3.20 GHz and boost of 4.00 GHz, cannot match the Zen cores running at a much lower base clock of 2000.00 MHz and boost of 3.60 GHz. The data indicates that clock speed alone does not determine performance; the Zen core is fundamentally more capable per cycle.

The aggregate benchmark scores reinforce this pattern. The FX-8320E’s average benchmark score is 1059, and its nearest rivals include the Ryzen 5 2500U itself with a deltaPct of 0.1 percent (meaning the FX-8320E is 0.1 percent ahead of the 2500U in average score). The 2500U’s average is 1058, with the FX-8320E listed as a rival at a deltaPct of -0.1 percent (the 2500U is 0.1 percent behind). These near-identical averages, despite the Geekbench results, suggest that the two CPUs are overall comparable in aggregate performance, but the 2500U’s wins come in the specific tests where modern architecture matters most.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more physical cores?

A: The AMD FX-8320E has 8 physical cores and 8 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 2500U has 4 physical cores and 8 threads, using simultaneous multithreading to reach the same thread count.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 2500U outperform the FX-8320E in all recorded benchmarks?

A: Yes. In the head-to-head benchmarks, the 2500U wins both Geekbench multicore (2635 vs 1681) and Geekbench singlecore (851 vs 437). The FX-8320E records zero wins.

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

A: The FX-8320E has a TDP of 95 W, while the Ryzen 5 2500U has a TDP of 15 W. The 2500U is designed for mobile use, whereas the FX-8320E is a desktop part.

Q: Can the FX-8320E be overclocked?

A: Yes, the FX-8320E has an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen 5 2500U does not, as its multiplier is locked.

Q: Which CPU supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Ryzen 5 2500U supports DDR4 memory with a peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The FX-8320E supports DDR3 with a peak bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s.

Q: How do their aggregate benchmark averages compare?

A: The FX-8320E has an average benchmark score of 1059, and the Ryzen 5 2500U has an average of 1058. The FX-8320E is 0.1 percent ahead of the 2500U in the average score comparison.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FX-8320E | AMD Ryzen 5 2500U |

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

| Cores | 8 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ | AMD Socket FP5 |

| Architecture | Piledriver | Zen |

| Codename | Vishera | Raven Ridge |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 1,200 million | 4,950 million |

| Die Size | 315 mm² | 210 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 8 MB | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Radeon Vega 8 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Release Date | 2014-09-01 | 2017-10-25 |

| Launch MSRP | $147 | null |

| Multiplier Unlocked | true | false |

| Part Number | FD832EWMW8KHKFD832EWMHKBOX | YM2500C4T4MFB |

| Geekbench Multicore | 1681 | 2635 |

| Geekbench Singlecore | 437 | 851 |

| Cinebench R15 Multicore | Not recorded | 609 |

| Cinebench R15 Singlecore | Not recorded | 137 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 29 | 29 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 1059 | 1058 |