AMD FX-8320E vs Intel Core i7-2820QM Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors almost perfectly down the middle, with each claiming one decisive victory in the head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core i7-2820QM takes the single-core crown, while the AMD FX-8320E asserts dominance in multi-core workloads. This is not a case of one chip being universally superior; rather, it reflects two fundamentally different design philosophies aimed at different usage patterns.

For tasks that rely on single-threaded performance, such as older games, lightly threaded productivity applications, or everyday desktop responsiveness, the Intel Core i7-2820QM holds a clear edge. Its Geekbench single-core score of 517 versus the AMD FX-8320E's 437 represents an 18.3% advantage, a substantial gap that will be noticeable in any software that cannot effectively utilize multiple cores. This makes the Intel part the better choice for users whose primary workloads involve legacy applications or titles that do not scale well across cores.

Conversely, the AMD FX-8320E wins in multi-threaded scenarios. Its Geekbench multi-core score of 1681 surpasses the Intel's 1623, a 3.5% delta in AMD's favor. While the percentage difference is smaller than Intel's single-core win, it still signals that the FX-8320E handles parallel workloads, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific simulations, with slightly better efficiency. The eight physical cores provide raw throughput that the four-core, eight-thread Intel part struggles to match in heavily threaded environments.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. The Intel Core i7-2820QM posts an average score of 1069, while the AMD FX-8320E sits at 1059. These figures are nearly identical, differing by less than 1%, which means that when averaged across all possible workloads, neither processor offers a meaningful overall advantage. Both chips occupy the 29th percentile among all CPUs in the database, placing them in the same performance tier despite their architectural differences.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural divide between these two processors is stark. The Intel Core i7-2820QM is built on the Sandy Bridge architecture, a 32 nm design from Intel's own foundries. It features four physical cores with Hyper-Threading, enabling eight threads, and operates at a base clock of 2.30 GHz with a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The AMD FX-8320E, conversely, uses the Piledriver architecture, also on a 32 nm process but manufactured by GlobalFoundries. It packs eight physical cores with no simultaneous multithreading, running at a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost of 4.00 GHz.

The cache layouts tell a compelling story. Intel employs a per-core hierarchy with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 for each core, plus a shared 8 MB L3 cache. AMD's approach differs significantly: it uses 384 KB of L1 total, a larger 8 MB L2 pool, and also shares 8 MB of L3. The AMD chip's larger aggregate L2 cache could benefit workloads that repeatedly access the same data, while Intel's per-core L2 allocation might reduce contention in multi-threaded scenarios.

The transistor counts are remarkably close: 1,160 million for Intel versus 1,200 million for AMD. However, the die sizes differ dramatically, with Intel at 216 mm² and AMD at 315 mm². This suggests AMD's eight-core layout requires more physical space, which aligns with its higher thermal and power envelope. The Intel part carries a 45 W TDP, while the AMD FX-8320E draws 95 W, more than double the Intel chip's power budget. This makes the Intel processor better suited for thermally constrained environments, while the AMD chip demands more robust cooling solutions.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel processor uses dual-channel memory with no official DDR3 specification listed in the data, while the AMD FX-8320E explicitly supports DDR3 with a measured memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The AMD chip also features PCIe Gen 2, whereas the Intel part's PCIe capabilities are not recorded. Integrated graphics differ as well: Intel includes HD 3000 graphics on-die, while AMD relies on "on certain motherboards" as a chipset feature, meaning the FX-8320E typically requires a discrete GPU for display output.

The socket situation further separates these platforms. Intel uses Socket G2 (988B), a mobile-oriented socket, while AMD uses Socket AM3+, a desktop standard. This reflects their market segments: the i7-2820QM is a mobile processor, while the FX-8320E is a desktop part. The Intel chip has a locked multiplier, whereas AMD's FX-8320E features an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking for enthusiasts willing to accept higher power draw and heat.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench, which provides both multi-core and single-core results. These two data points capture the entire competitive picture. In the multi-core test, the AMD FX-8320E scores 1681 against the Intel Core i7-2820QM's 1623, giving AMD a 3.5% lead. This margin, while modest, is consistent across the eight-core versus four-core comparison. The AMD chip's higher base and boost clocks, combined with additional physical cores, allow it to sustain better throughput in parallel workloads.

The single-core test flips the result decisively. Intel scores 517, while AMD manages only 437, yielding an 18.3% advantage for Intel. This is a much larger gap than AMD's multi-core win, indicating that Intel's Sandy Bridge architecture delivers superior per-core performance. The lower clock speeds of the Intel chip (2.30 GHz base, 3.40 GHz boost) are compensated by a more efficient execution pipeline, whereas AMD's higher clocks cannot overcome the architectural inefficiencies of Piledriver in single-threaded tasks.

When considering the nearest rivals from the database, both processors sit in a crowded mid-range field. The Intel Core i7-2820QM's closest competitor is the Intel Processor N95, which scores 1070 on average, a mere 0.1% difference. The AMD FX-8320E's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-4350, also at 1058 average score, again a 0.1% delta. This proximity suggests that both chips are performance peers with a broad range of similarly capable CPUs, and the winner in any given task depends heavily on the specific workload's threading characteristics.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the choice between these two processors hinges entirely on workload type. The Intel Core i7-2820QM is the superior option for single-threaded applications, offering an 18.3% performance advantage that will translate directly into faster response times for legacy software, many games, and general desktop use. Its lower TDP of 45 W also makes it more suitable for thin-and-light laptops or systems with modest cooling.

The AMD FX-8320E wins in multi-threaded scenarios, albeit by a smaller 3.5% margin. For users who prioritize video rendering, batch processing, or other parallel tasks, the eight physical cores provide a measurable benefit. The unlocked multiplier and higher clock speeds (up to 4.00 GHz) offer overclocking headroom that the locked Intel chip cannot match, potentially widening the multi-core gap further in enthusiast hands.

For a mobile user seeking balanced performance with lower power consumption, the Intel part is the pragmatic choice. For a desktop builder focused on multi-threaded throughput and willing to manage a 95 W TDP, the AMD chip holds appeal. The data does not crown a single winner; it presents two complementary profiles, each suited to different priorities.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-2820QM, with a Geekbench single-core score of 517 versus the AMD FX-8320E's 437, an 18.3% advantage.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD FX-8320E, scoring 1681 in Geekbench multi-core compared to Intel's 1623, a 3.5% lead for AMD.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i7-2820QM averages 1069, while the AMD FX-8320E averages 1059, a difference of less than 1% that places both in the 29th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The Intel chip has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD FX-8320E has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor consumes less power?

A: The Intel Core i7-2820QM has a 45 W TDP, significantly lower than the AMD FX-8320E's 95 W TDP.

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

A: Yes, its multiplier is unlocked, whereas the Intel Core i7-2820QM has a locked multiplier.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2820QM | AMD FX-8320E |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | AMD Socket AM3+ |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Piledriver |

| Codename | Sandy Bridge | Vishera |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 32 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

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

| Die Size | 216 mm² | 315 mm² |

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

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

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

| Memory Support | Not specified | DDR3 |

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

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 2 |

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

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | January 2011 | September 2014 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $147 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |