Both CPUs are manufactured by AMD.
AMD FX-4320 has a higher base speed of 4.0 GHz compared to AMD A9-9820's 2.3 GHz.
AMD FX-4320 has a higher turbo speed of 4.2 GHz compared to AMD A9-9820's 2.4 GHz.
AMD A9-9820 has more cores (8) compared to AMD FX-4320's 4 cores.
AMD A9-9820 supports more threads (8) compared to AMD FX-4320's threads.
Both CPUs belong to the same class: Desktop.
AMD A9-9820 uses the socket, while AMD FX-4320 uses the AM3+ socket.
AMD A9-9820 was launched in Q2 2021, while AMD FX-4320 was launched in Q1 2016.
AMD FX-4320 has a larger L3 cache of 4 MB compared to AMD A9-9820's MB.
Specification Summary
The AMD A9-9820 and AMD FX-4320 are two processors with distinct specifications. Below is a detailed comparison of their key features:
Manufacturer: Both processors are manufactured by AMD.
Speed: The AMD A9-9820 has a base speed of 2.3 GHz, while the AMD FX-4320 runs at 4.0 GHz.
Turbo Boost: The AMD A9-9820 supports a turbo speed of 2.4 GHz, compared to 4.2 GHz for the AMD FX-4320.
Cores: The AMD A9-9820 has 8 cores, while the AMD FX-4320 has 4 cores.
Threads: The AMD A9-9820 supports 8 threads, compared to threads for the AMD FX-4320.
Class: Both processors are designed for Desktop use.
Socket: The AMD A9-9820 uses the , while the AMD FX-4320 uses the AM3+.
Launch Date: The AMD A9-9820 was launched on Q2 2021, while the AMD FX-4320 was released on Q1 2016.
L3 Cache: The AMD A9-9820 has MB of L3 cache, compared to 4 MB for the AMD FX-4320.
Detailed Specifications:
Specs
AMD A9-9820
AMD FX-4320
Manufacturer
AMD
AMD
Speed
2.3 GHz
4.0 GHz
Turbo
2.4 GHz
4.2 GHz
Cores
8
4
Threads
8
Class
Desktop
Desktop
Socket
AM3+
Launched
Q2 2021
Q1 2016
L3 Cache
MB
4 MB
Review:
Single Core Performance:
CPU Performance in single-threaded applications
AMD A9-9820:
13%
AMD FX-4320:
26%
* More is Better
Multi Core Performance:
CPU Performance in multi-threaded applications
AMD A9-9820
5%
AMD FX-4320:
4%
* More is Better
Power Efficiency:
Power Consumption of CPU under full load
AMD A9-9820: watts
0%
AMD FX-4320: 95 watts
23.75%
* Lower is Better
Launched Date:
Time when the CPU was launched
AMD A9-9820 : Q2 2021 ✅
AMD FX-4320 : Q1 2016 ✅
* Newer is Better
CPU Launch FINAL SCORE:
CPU Final Rating Ratings
AMD A9-9820
AMD FX-4320
Pro's and Con's
AMD A9-9820 – Pros and Cons
Pros:
Newer Release: The AMD A9-9820 was launched more recently (Q2 2021) compared to the AMD FX-4320 (Q1 2016). This means it benefits from the latest advancements in technology, improved efficiency, and potentially better software optimization.
Cons:
Not available
AMD FX-4320 – Pros and Cons
Pros:
Higher Base Clock Speed: The AMD FX-4320 has a higher base clock speed of 4.0 GHz compared to the AMD A9-9820's 2.3 GHz. This results in better performance for single-threaded tasks and general responsiveness.
Higher Turbo Boost Speed: The AMD FX-4320 supports a higher turbo boost speed of 4.2 GHz compared to the AMD A9-9820's 2.4 GHz. This allows for better performance during peak workloads.
Faster Single-Core Performance: With a single-threaded performance score of 1564, the AMD FX-4320 outperforms the AMD A9-9820 (score: 800). This makes it better suited for tasks that rely on single-core performance, such as gaming or everyday productivity.
Larger L3 Cache: The AMD FX-4320 features a larger L3 cache of 4MB compared to the AMD A9-9820's MB. A larger cache improves performance in memory-intensive tasks, such as video editing or 3D rendering, by reducing latency and speeding up data access.
Cons:
Fewer Cores: The AMD FX-4320 has 4 cores, which is fewer than the AMD A9-9820's 8 cores. This could impact performance in multi-threaded workloads, such as rendering, compiling code, or running virtual machines.
Fewer Threads: The AMD FX-4320 has threads, which is fewer than the AMD A9-9820's 8 threads. This may limit its ability to handle highly parallel workloads efficiently.
Lower Multi-Core Performance: In multi-threaded tasks, the AMD FX-4320 scores 3150, which is lower than the AMD A9-9820's score of 3938. This makes the AMD A9-9820 a better choice for heavy multitasking or parallel processing.
Higher Power Consumption: The AMD FX-4320 has a higher TDP of 95W compared to the AMD A9-9820's W. This means it may consume more power, leading to higher energy costs and potentially more heat generation, which could require better cooling solutions.
Productivity
AMD A9-9820
This cpu Handles Entry Level level office applications, web browsing, and media playback with ease.
It can also be used for Entry Level level multitasking or CPU-intensive tasks like video editing or 3D rendering.
AMD FX-4320
This cpu Handles Entry Level level office applications, web browsing, and media playback with ease.
It can also be used for Entry Level level multitasking or CPU-intensive tasks like video editing or 3D rendering.
Gaming
AMD A9-9820
Ideal for Entry Level level gaming (when paired with a dedicated GPU) and Entry Level level computing.
AMD FX-4320
Ideal for Entry Level level gaming (when paired with a dedicated GPU) and Entry Level level computing.
Verdict
AMD A9-9820
The AMD A9-9820 is a reliable and Entry Level processor for your PC builds. It delivers excellent value for users with Entry Level computing needs or those building a New PC.
AMD FX-4320
The AMD FX-4320 is a reliable and Entry Level processor for your PC builds. It delivers excellent value for users with Entry Level computing needs or those building a New PC.
