HowManyFPS Desktop App v1.25.3Track Bottlenecks and Boost Your FPSOpen HowManyFPS.com on your PC to benchmark

CPU Comparison: FPS, Specs & Value

FX-8320 vs Core Ultra 7 265

The FX-8320 is much slower than the Core Ultra 7 265 on average across 100+ games. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $301.23 cheaper!

bar_chartBenchmarks groupCommunity calculateFPS Calculator compressBottleneck Calculator

CPU

$73.76View CPUAll CPUs

Up to 133% cheaper – $73.76 vs $374.99

CPU

$374.99View CPUAll CPUs

Up to 232% faster on average across 100+ games
Is 12 years and 5 months newer
Up to 42% better value for money
Up to 133% more expensive – $374.99 vs $73.76

FPS Comparison Across Popular Games

Predicted average FPS at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, based on real game benchmarks.

Resolution

Quality

Paired GPU

View Compare All GPUs

Select GPU

Escape From Tarkov2017

FX-8320

208FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

253FPS

League of Legends2009

FX-8320

123FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

367FPS

Grand Theft Auto V2013

FX-8320

185FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

221FPS

Dota 22013

FX-8320

169FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

271FPS

Valorant2020

FX-8320

539FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

741FPS

Fortnite2017

FX-8320

329FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

329FPS

Minecraft2011

FX-8320

575FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

776FPS

Overwatch 22023

FX-8320

525FPS

Core Ultra 7 265

559FPS

Specs & Benchmark Comparison

Side-by-side specs, synthetic benchmarks, and key hardware differences.

Scorehelp

FX-8320

Core Ultra 7 265

60%

Core Ultra 7 265 ranks 56 points higher.

Coreshelp

FX-8320

Core Ultra 7 265

Core Ultra 7 265 has 12 more cores.

Threadshelp

FX-8320

Core Ultra 7 265

Core Ultra 7 265 has 12 more threads.

L3 Cachehelp

FX-8320

8 MB

Core Ultra 7 265

30 MB

Core Ultra 7 265 has 22 MB more L3 cache.

Base Frequencyhelp

FX-8320

3.5 GHz

Core Ultra 7 265

2.4 GHz

FX-8320 has a 46% higher base clock.

Turbo Frequencyhelp

FX-8320

4 GHz

Core Ultra 7 265

5.3 GHz

Core Ultra 7 265 boosts 32% higher.

TDPhelp

FX-8320

125W

Core Ultra 7 265

65W

Core Ultra 7 265 draws 60W less power.

Pricehelp

FX-8320

$73.76

Core Ultra 7 265

$374.99

FX-8320 is $301.23 cheaper.

FX-8320Core Ultra 7 265

AM3+

Sockethelp

LGA1851

Vishera

Codenamehelp

Arrow Lake-S

Desktop

Segmenthelp

Desktop

On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Integrated GPUhelp

Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU

DDR3

RAMhelp

6400 MHz (DDR5)

Overclockable

Overclock Supporthelp

Not Overclockable

Frequently Asked Questions

compare_arrowsWhich is better, FX-8320 or Core Ultra 7 265?expand_more

The Core Ultra 7 265. It's 1400% faster than the FX-8320 on average across 100+ games, scoring 60/100 vs 4/100 in our gaming rating.

speedHow much faster is Core Ultra 7 265 than FX-8320?expand_more

1400% faster on average. The gap varies by game and resolution, check the per-game FPS comparison above.

aspect_ratioWhich is better for 1440p and 4K gaming, FX-8320 or Core Ultra 7 265?expand_more

The Core Ultra 7 265 is faster at both resolutions. Toggle the resolution selector above to see per-game FPS.

paidIs the Core Ultra 7 265 worth buying in 2026?expand_more

It scores 60/100 in our gaming rating, faster than most CPUs on the market. Good buy if the price is right.

differenceWhat is the difference between FX-8320 and Core Ultra 7 265?expand_more

Performance: FX-8320 scores 4/100, Core Ultra 7 265 scores 60/100. They also differ in core count, clock speeds, L3 cache, and power draw. Full breakdown in the specs section above.

compressWill the FX-8320 or Core Ultra 7 265 bottleneck my PC?expand_more

Depends on the rest of your build, especially your GPU. Swap the paired GPU in the FPS section above to see if it limits performance, or use our bottleneck calculator for a full analysis.

upgradeIs it worth upgrading to the FX-8320 or Core Ultra 7 265?expand_more

The Core Ultra 7 265 is the stronger pick at 60/100. Compare your current CPU against it to see the exact FPS gain across 100+ games.