Frontpage Deal
Amazon Discounts, Deals and Coupon Codes

AMD FX-8320 AM3+ 8-Core Black Edition Processor EXPIRED

OrigamiRobot 3 26 November 30, 2015 at 04:00 PM in CPUs (5) More Amazon Deals
Sorry, this deal has expired. Get notified of deals like this in the future. Add Deal Alert for this Item
Deal
Score
+73
38,113 Views
See Deal
$100

Deal Details

Promoted 11-30-2015 by Corwin at 08:29 PM View Original Post
Amazon.com has AMD FX-8320 AM3+ 8-Core Black Edition Processor (FD8320FRHKBOX) on sale for $99.99. Shipping is free. Thanks OrigamiRobot

Editor's Notes & Price Research

Written by Corwin

Be sure to checkout the 700+ customer reviews on Amazon that give this processor a 4.7 out of 5 star rating -Corwin

Share

Original Post

Amazon [amazon.com] has the FX-8320 for $99.99
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
About the OP
Give Rep Send Message
Joined Nov 2015 L1: Learner
26 Reputation Points
1 Deals Posted
1 Votes Submitted
3 Comments Posted
Don't have Amazon Prime? Students can get a free 6-Month Amazon Prime trial with free 2-day shipping, unlimited music, unlimited video streaming & more. If you're not a student, there's also a free 1-Month Amazon Prime trial available.

Community Wiki

This post can be edited by most users to provide up-to-date information about developments of this thread based on user responses, and user findings. Feel free to add, change or remove information shown here as it becomes available. This includes new coupons, rebates, ideas, thread summary, and similar items.

Once a Thread Wiki is added to a thread, "Create Wiki" button will disappear. If you would like to learn more about Thread Wiki feature, click here.

141 Comments

1 2 3 4 5

Featured Comments

The cheapest processor in your charts is 50% more expensive.

That 4.6 overclock may be throttled because the reviewer didn't disable APM. If you don't disable APM then the board will prevent the processor from using more power than the chip is specified for. Since the 8320E is a low-power model, that power specification is very low.

If you don't overclock an FX the right way then your multicore performance in particular will be poor. The tiny improvement between the stock speed and 4.6 in those charts points to the reviewer not knowing how to overclock an FX.

The 8320E at stock uses about 86 watts. It is specified to use 95 watts. So, the tiny gains shown in those charts from the overclock could be due to the chip going up to 95 watts rather than staying at around 86. A real 4.6 GHz overclock uses a lot more than 95 watts and should produce a lot more gain given the low clockspeed of a stock 8320E and the fact that 8 integer cores, all overclocked, should dramatically increase performance.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#4
Damn I have a 6300, don't really see the need to upgrade. Possibly I can grab a cooler with this to go with my asus evo mobo and pair the 6 core with the asrock pro3m-atx.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 2
#5
Pair this with a decent motherboard, good PSU, and good cooling and you can readily get it to 4.5 GHz.

Pair it with a poor-quality motherboard and you'll want to stay at stock speed.
Reply Helpful Comment? 3 0
Joined Jun 2006
L10: Grand Master
8,930 Posts
2,709 Reputation
#6
Kind of a tossup between this and the FX-6300 ($89 currently at the egg). Unless you're overclocking and/or doing seriously heavyweight processing, FX-6300 is generally a better buy. 95W vs 125W makes a big difference in power usage and will tax your PSU less.

Regardless of which you get, go for a quality cpu cooler (Hyper 212 is a favorite of mine if you have space in your case), and set max cpu usage to 95% (might not make a difference but one of my things that I don't like cpu's 100% maxed ever).

For most things like productivity, media playback, and gaming, having a good video card and a good amount of ram matters more than minor cpu differences.

My personal take would be still go with the FX-6300 over this (even at $10 difference) for the energy / heat savings. Don't get me wrong, this is a great deal on this cpu if it's what you're looking for.
Reply Helpful Comment? 2 1
#7
Quote from compguy View Post :
Kind of a tossup between this and the FX-6300 ($89 currently at the egg). Unless you're overclocking and/or doing seriously heavyweight processing, FX-6300 is generally a better buy. 95W vs 125W makes a big difference in power usage and will tax your PSU less.

Regardless of which you get, go for a quality cpu cooler (Hyper 212 is a favorite of mine if you have space in your case), and set max cpu usage to 95% (might not make a difference but one of my things that I don't like cpu's 100% maxed ever).

For most things like productivity, media playback, and gaming, having a good video card and a good amount of ram matters more than minor cpu differences.

My personal take would be still go with the FX-6300 over this (even at $10 difference) for the energy / heat savings. Don't get me wrong, this is a great deal on this cpu if it's what you're looking for.
The six core chips are a lot weaker in doing things that can use all the cores, like Blender and Handbrake.

And, because AMD's design uses modules (4 modules for an eight core and 3 modules for a six core) only the 8 core chip has 4 floating point units. As a result, the floating point performance is significantly better with the 8 core models.

The 8 core chips also have more cache than the 6300.

The Hyper 212 is OK for stock speeds but if you plan to overclock this is your best bang for the buck:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Pro...6835709002

If you want a budget workstation then the 8 core chips, overclocked are definitely better. If you're just doing casual computing then a six core or eight core at stock will both work. Eight core chips can be run with fewer cores enabled, too. So, instead of getting a six core chip you can always turn off a module on an eight core chip and then have the option later of running the full chip.

At this price it doesn't make sense to buy a six core FX.
Reply Helpful Comment? 3 0
#8
Here is a topic that can give you an ideal of how to build a good-quality "enthusiast" (non-crap) system with one of these chips:

http://slickdeals.net/f/8322707-amd-fx-budget-enthusiast-build-compilation-of-current-deals?p=80027185#post80027185

The deals may be out of date some, but the basic idea is there, along with overlocking information
Reply Helpful Comment? 2 0
#9
Quote from superstition View Post :
The six core chips are a lot weaker in doing things that can use all the cores, like Blender and Handbrake.
AMD does very poorly compared to Intel: http://www.techspot.com/articles-...ing_01.png

http://www.techspot.com/articles-...ing_03.png
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 2
#10
Quote from rruff View Post :
AMD does very poorly compared to Intel: http://www.techspot.com/articles-...ing_01.png

http://www.techspot.com/articles-...ing_03.png
The cheapest processor in your charts is 50% more expensive.

That 4.6 overclock may be throttled because the reviewer didn't disable APM. If you don't disable APM then the board will prevent the processor from using more power than the chip is specified for. Since the 8320E is a low-power model, that power specification is very low.

If you don't overclock an FX the right way then your multicore performance in particular will be poor. The tiny improvement between the stock speed and 4.6 in those charts points to the reviewer not knowing how to overclock an FX.

The 8320E at stock uses about 86 watts. It is specified to use 95 watts. So, the tiny gains shown in those charts from the overclock could be due to the chip going up to 95 watts rather than staying at around 86. A real 4.6 GHz overclock uses a lot more than 95 watts and should produce a lot more gain given the low clockspeed of a stock 8320E and the fact that 8 integer cores, all overclocked, should dramatically increase performance.
Reply Helpful Comment? 8 0
Last edited by superstition November 30, 2015 at 07:38 PM

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#11
Quote from superstition View Post :
The cheapest processor in your charts is 50% more expensive.
Brand new Skylake i3-6100 was only $109 yesterday. The i3-4170 was $70 last week.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#12
I have the 8310 paired with the Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 mobo and it's very nice, picked up the 8310 for $115 back in April, the 8320 was $140 at best back then, $100 is a steal.
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 0
#13
Quote from rruff View Post :
Brand new Skylake i3-6100 was only $109 yesterday. The i3-4170 was $70 last week.
With proper overclocking, FX can be fine for most games. In fact, they have even beaten a $1000 Haswell in SLI 4K tests with some games.

A properly overclocked FX chip should beat an i3 in workloads like Blender that take advantage of all 8 integer cores. FX should be seen as a budget workstation chip.

Also, how are the board prices for those Skylake i3s? An Asus high-quality board suitable for overclocking FX is on sale for $70 at the moment.

Also, this test makes the i3 look potentially inadequate for some games, since it can't be overclocked to boost minimum framerate. Even a stock FX at just 4.0 GHz beats it:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles...out-4-4023
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 0
Last edited by superstition November 30, 2015 at 09:39 PM
#14
Pair it with a Good Gfx card and things can look pretty. Well thats if you overclock of course. Get 990fx board, a Good cooler and go to town.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#15
as someone with an AMD system for last 10 years, don't waste your time. Intel is on top now and will be for a few years.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 1 of 10
1 2 3 4 5
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard