When it comes to encoding with HandBrake, the quad-core FX-8320E isn't nearly as potent as one might expect. With just 125.1fps it was 26% slower than the dual-core Core i3-4360 and 45% slower than the Core i5-4430. Overclocking the FX-8320E only improved performance by 8%, still 20% slower than the Core i3-4360.
If it weren't enough for the FX-8320E to be 26% slower than a dual-core processor in this test, it had to consume the same amount of power to achieve that bummer of a result. Moreover, the 8% boost from overclocking translated into 70% more power consumption.
The FX-8320E matched the i5-4430 in x264 HD Benchmark while being 6% faster than the i3-4360 in the second pass and 45% faster in the first. Overclocking only had a slight impact on the results, raising the second pass performance by 9%.
Here we see that the FX-8320E consumed roughly 58% more power than the Intel processors and over 130% more once overclocked.
The last encoding test is based on TMPGEnc Video Master Works and here the AMD FX-8320E was 16% slower than the Core i3-4360 and 40% slower than the Core i5-4430. Overclocking the FX-8320E only improved performance by a mere 3%.
Pushing the FX-8320E to 4.6GHz offered just 3% more performance and increased power consumption by 48%. Prior to any overclocking the FX-8320E still consumed 33% more power than the i3-4360.