Core i5-7400 vs FX-8320

CPU

GPU

Core i5-7400

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2017

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-8320

8 Cores8 Thrd125 WWMax: 4 GHz2012

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-7400

4 / 4

5,477

+0.1%

5,472

0.0%

Athlon X4 830

Athlon X4 880K

Ryzen Embedded R1606G

FX-8140

Ryzen 7 5700

Ryzen AI Max PRO 390

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-7400

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 630, while FX-8320 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8320 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (3,359 vs 4,500).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.6 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).

FX-8320

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $125 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).
✅Delivers 73.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.4 vs 18.6 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-7400 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-7400

2017

FX-8320

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 630, while FX-8320 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $125 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).
✅Delivers 73.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.4 vs 18.6 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-8320 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (3,359 vs 4,500).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.6 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-7400 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-8320 better than Core i5-7400?

Yes. FX-8320 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 6.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 34% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-8320 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 6.5% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-8320 is the better fit. You are getting 34% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

FX-8320 is the smarter buy today. FX-8320 is $125 cheaper on MSRP at $169 MSRP versus $294 MSRP, and it gives you a 6.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 73.8% better value on MSRP (32.4 vs 18.6 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-7400 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-7400 Benchmark Check

FX-8320 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
1080p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	112 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	114 FPS	120 FPS
high	89 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	70 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	65 FPS
medium	59 FPS	58 FPS
high	46 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	36 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-7400 Open FX-8320

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
1080p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	116 FPS	137 FPS
1440p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	129 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	103 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	134 FPS	137 FPS
medium	114 FPS	137 FPS
high	89 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	66 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core i5-7400 Open FX-8320

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
1080p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS
1440p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS

Open Core i5-7400 Open FX-8320

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
1080p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS
1440p
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	137 FPS	137 FPS
medium	137 FPS	137 FPS
high	137 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	137 FPS

Open Core i5-7400 Open FX-8320

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-7400 and FX-8320

Core i5-7400

The Core i5-7400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 5,477 points. Launch price was $182.

FX-8320

The FX-8320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,472 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-7400 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-8320 offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the FX-8320 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i5-7400 versus 4 GHz on the FX-8320 — a 13.3% clock advantage for the FX-8320 (base: 3 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i5-7400 uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-8320 uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-7400 scores 5,477 against the FX-8320's 5,472 — a 0.1% lead for the Core i5-7400. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 3,359 vs 4,500 (29% advantage for the FX-8320). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,215 vs 458, a 90.5% lead for the Core i5-7400 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 3,517 vs 1,791 (65% advantage for the Core i5-7400).

Feature	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	8 / 8+100%
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz	4 GHz+14%
Base Clock	3 GHz	3.5 GHz+17%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	8192 kB+3100%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	5,477	5,472
Cinebench R23 Multi	3,359	4,500+34%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,215+165%	458
Geekbench 6 Multi	3,517+96%	1,791

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-7400 uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-8320 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Core i5-7400 versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320 — the Core i5-7400 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-7400 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 100-series,200-series (Core i5-7400) and 970,990X,990FX (FX-8320).

Feature	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
Socket	LGA1151	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+33%	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+100%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the FX-8320 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-7400) vs AMD-V (FX-8320). The Core i5-7400 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 630), while the FX-8320 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-7400 targets Gaming, FX-8320 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: Core i5-7400 rivals Ryzen 3 3300X; FX-8320 rivals Core i5-3570.

Feature	Core i5-7400	FX-8320
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Productivity

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-7400 launched at $294 MSRP, while the FX-8320 debuted at $169. On MSRP ($294 vs $169), the FX-8320 is $125 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-7400 delivers 18.6 pts/$ vs 32.4 pts/$ for the FX-8320 — making the FX-8320 the 53.9% better value option.