CPU Comparison

AMD FX-8320E and Intel Core i7-2760QM are both end-of-life processors that land in the same performance tier, yet they achieve parity through completely different design philosophies. The data shows a near-perfect statistical tie in average benchmark score, the AMD FX-8320E posts an average of 1059, while the Intel Core i7-2760QM averages 1057, a mere 0.2% difference. Both sit at the 29th percentile of all CPUs, placing them in the entry-level segment of the current market. However, the Geekbench results reveal a clear split: the AMD FX-8320E wins multi-core by 3.4%, while the Intel Core i7-2760QM dominates single-core by 18.2%. This is a classic case of core count versus architectural efficiency, and the right choice depends entirely on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmarks in the data are the Geekbench tests, and they tell a story of divergent strengths. In Geekbench multi-core, the AMD FX-8320E scores 1681 against the Intel Core i7-2760QM's 1625, giving AMD a 3.4% advantage. This is a modest but consistent win, reflecting the FX-8320E's eight physical cores working in parallel. The Intel part counters decisively in Geekbench single-core, scoring 534 versus AMD's 437, a commanding 18.2% lead. That single-core margin is nearly six times larger than AMD's multi-core advantage, indicating that the Intel architecture extracts far more performance per thread.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this near-parity. The FX-8320E's average of 1059 places it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i3-4350 and the AMD Ryzen 5 2500U, both of which score 1058. The i7-2760QM's average of 1057 puts it 0.1% behind the Intel Pentium G4600 at 1056 and 0.1% behind the Ryzen 5 2500U. Notably, each processor appears in the other's nearest rival list with a deltaPct of 0.2%, the FX-8320E is 0.2% ahead of the i7-2760QM, and the i7-2760QM is 0.2% behind the FX-8320E. When two CPUs are this close in aggregate, the individual benchmark splits become the only meaningful differentiator.

The wins are evenly split at 1-1, but the magnitude of those wins is not symmetrical. AMD's 3.4% multi-core lead is a narrow margin that could be workload-dependent, while Intel's 18.2% single-core lead is a substantial gap that will be felt in any application that relies heavily on single-threaded performance. For users who primarily run lightly-threaded software, the Intel part is the clear winner. For those who can fully utilize eight cores, the AMD part offers a slight edge.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different approaches to CPU design. The AMD FX-8320E 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 Core i7-2760QM uses the Sandy Bridge architecture, also on a 32 nm process, but manufactured by Intel with 1,160 million transistors on a significantly smaller 216 mm² die. The die size difference of 99 mm² is notable, Intel fits nearly the same transistor count into roughly two-thirds of the silicon area.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The FX-8320E offers 8 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-2760QM offers 4 cores and 8 threads via Hyper-Threading. This means the AMD part has twice the physical cores, but the Intel part uses simultaneous multithreading to match the thread count. The base and boost clocks also differ: the FX-8320E runs at 3.20 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost, while the i7-2760QM runs at 2.40 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. The AMD part has a 0.80 GHz base clock advantage and a 0.50 GHz boost clock advantage, yet still loses single-core performance, a clear indication that IPC (instructions per clock) favors Intel heavily.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently as well. The FX-8320E has 384 KB of L1 cache, 8 MB of L2 cache, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-2760QM has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. For the Intel part, that translates to 256 KB of L1 total and 1 MB of L2 total across four cores. The AMD part offers significantly more total cache memory, but the Intel cache is more tightly integrated per core. Power consumption is another major divider: the FX-8320E has a 95 W TDP, while the i7-2760QM draws only 45 W. That 50 W difference is substantial, especially considering the i7-2760QM is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1224, whereas the FX-8320E is a desktop chip on AMD Socket AM3+.

The FX-8320E supports DDR3 memory with dual-channel access and 29.9 GB/s of bandwidth, while the i7-2760QM's memory support is not specified in the data, though it also uses dual-channel memory. The FX-8320E has PCIe Gen 2 support, while the i7-2760QM's PCIe specification is not listed. Integrated graphics differ: the FX-8320E relies on chipset-based graphics on certain motherboards, while the i7-2760QM includes Intel HD 3000. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the Intel part is locked. Release dates are three years apart, the i7-2760QM launched in September 2011, and the FX-8320E launched in September 2014.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FX-8320E wins in multi-threaded workloads. Its 3.4% Geekbench multi-core advantage, combined with eight physical cores, makes it the better choice for applications that scale across many threads, video rendering, 3D modeling, scientific computing, or any modern game that uses multiple cores. The 8 MB of L2 cache and 8 MB of shared L3 cache provide ample data storage for parallel workloads. The higher base clock of 3.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz also help in sustained multi-core operations. The unlocked multiplier is a significant advantage for users willing to overclock, potentially widening the multi-core gap further.

The Intel Core i7-2760QM wins decisively in single-threaded performance. Its 18.2% Geekbench single-core lead means it will feel snappier in everyday tasks like web browsing, office applications, and legacy software that only uses one or two threads. The 45 W TDP makes it far more suitable for laptops and compact systems where heat and battery life matter. The integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics provide a complete package without needing a separate GPU, whereas the FX-8320E requires a motherboard with chipset-based graphics. The smaller die size of 216 mm² suggests better manufacturing efficiency, and the lower transistor count of 1,160 million with similar performance indicates superior architectural efficiency.

For gaming, the Intel part is likely the better choice for older or less demanding titles that rely on single-core speed. For modern games that use multiple cores, the AMD part's additional physical cores could provide an edge, though the 18.2% single-core deficit may offset that in mixed workloads. For productivity, the AMD part wins in render farms or video encoding, while the Intel part wins in spreadsheet-heavy tasks or programming where single-thread latency matters.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-8320E averages 1059, while the Intel Core i7-2760QM averages 1057. The FX-8320E is 0.2% ahead of the i7-2760QM in average score.

Q: How much faster is the Intel part in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-2760QM scores 534 in Geekbench single-core versus the AMD FX-8320E's 437, giving Intel an 18.2% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD FX-8320E have more cores than the Intel Core i7-2760QM?

A: Yes, the FX-8320E has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-2760QM has 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

A: The AMD FX-8320E has a 95 W TDP, and the Intel Core i7-2760QM has a 45 W TDP, a difference of 50 W.

Q: Which processor is older?

A: The Intel Core i7-2760QM was released in September 2011, while the AMD FX-8320E was released in September 2014.

Q: Can the AMD FX-8320E be overclocked?

A: Yes, the FX-8320E has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Core i7-2760QM is locked.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FX-8320E | Intel Core i7-2760QM |

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

| Cores | 8 | 4 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ | Intel BGA 1224 |

| Architecture | Piledriver | Sandy Bridge |

| Codename | Vishera | Sandy Bridge |

| Die Size | 315 mm² | 216 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,200 million | 1,160 million |

| L1 Cache | 384 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 8 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | Not specified |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Not specified |

| Integrated Graphics | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel HD 3000 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | September 2014 | September 2011 |

| Launch MSRP | $147 | Not specified |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. For users who prioritize multi-threaded performance, the AMD FX-8320E is the pick, its 3.4% Geekbench multi-core lead and eight physical cores provide a tangible advantage in parallel workloads. The unlocked multiplier adds overclocking potential that the Intel part lacks. However, this comes at the cost of a 95 W TDP, making it suitable only for desktop systems with adequate cooling.

For users who value single-threaded speed and power efficiency, the Intel Core i7-2760QM is the obvious choice. Its 18.2% Geekbench single-core lead is a massive margin that will be noticeable in daily use. The 45 W TDP makes it viable for laptops and compact builds, and the integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The locked multiplier is a drawback, but the architectural efficiency of Sandy Bridge compensates.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 1059 versus 1057, so neither processor offers a general-purpose advantage. The decision hinges entirely on workload. Multi-threaded rendering or scientific computing favors the AMD part. Single-threaded applications, mobile use, or power-sensitive builds favor the Intel part. Both are end-of-life products, so availability and platform compatibility should drive the final choice. The FX-8320E requires an AM3+ motherboard, while the i7-2760QM requires a BGA 1224 socket, typically soldered on laptops. The AMD part is the better value for desktop users who can leverage eight cores, while the Intel part is the better value for mobile users who need efficiency and single-thread responsiveness.