Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game FX-4320 Athlon II X4 559
Cyberpunk 2077 54% 57%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 107% 111%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 49% 52%
Grand Theft Auto VI 153% 158%
FIFA 21 44% 47%
Genshin Impact 17% 19%
Far Cry 6 143% 148%
Hitman 3 107% 111%
Watch Dogs Legion 107% 111%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 139% 144%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD FX-4320 is marginally better than the AMD Athlon II X4 559 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The FX-4320 was released over a year more recently than the Athlon II X4, and so the FX-4320 is likely to have better levels of support, and will be more optimized for running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings (assuming they are accompanied by equivalently powerful GPUs).

The FX-4320 and the Athlon II X4 both have 4 cores, which is not likely to be a limiting factor for gaming.

Both the AMD FX-4320 and the AMD Athlon II X4 559 have the same number of threads. Both CPUs have one thread per physical core.

Multiple threads are useful for improving the performance of multi-threaded applications. Additional cores and their accompanying thread will always be beneficial for multi-threaded applications. Hyperthreading will be beneficial for applications optimized for it, but it may slow others down. For games, the number of threads is largely irrelevant, as long as you have at least 2 cores (preferably 4), and hyperthreading can sometimes even hit performance.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The FX-4320 and Athlon II X4 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the FX-4320 has a 0.6 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is enough that it possibly indicates the superiority of the .

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The FX-4320 has a 2048 KB bigger L2 cache than the Athlon II X4, but on the other hand, it is the Athlon II X4 that has a 2 MB bigger L3 cache than the FX-4320. The L3 size of the FX-4320 is probably low enough to greatly inhibit its gaming performance in comparison to the Athlon II X4.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The FX-4320 has a 64 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Athlon II X4, and was created with a 13 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the FX-4320 will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameVisheraCallisto
MoBo SocketSocket AM3+Socket AM2+ / AM3
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date23 Oct 201201 Jan 2011
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores4vs4
CPU Threads4vs4
Clock Speed4 GHzvs3.4 GHz
Turbo Frequency4.2 GHzvs-
Max TDP95 Wvs159 W
Lithography32 nmvs45 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size192 KBvs512 KB
L2 Cache Size4096 KBvs2048 KB
L3 Cache Size4 MBvs6 MB
Memory Channels-vs2
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewFX-4320 is a middle-class CPU based on the 32nm Piledriver architecture.

It offers 4 Physical Cores (4 Logical), initially clocked at 4.0GHz, which may go up to 4.2GHz and 4MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrate any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 95W.

It offers average performance. It will therefore become a bottleneck in today's demanding games.
This is the unlocked version of the Phenom II X2 B59.