Which CPU is better?

[ClubGaming_]

I'm deciding on two different CPUs for a build. One is the Intel Core I5 4570 and the other is a AMD Athlon X4 760K. Both don't have any hyper threading and the AMD athlon is about .6 GHz faster while being almost 100 dollars cheaper. Why is the I5 so expensive while it has less speed then the Athlon? Am i missing something? Thanks!

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

the core i5 is A LOT better than the athlon X4 760K that's why it cost more, it's almost twice as fast..

it's not like in the old days anymore where a 1ghz cpu was about the same on intel and AMD...now they have very complex architectures and the intel is vastly superior...it has a much higher IPC (instructions per clock) therefore it can process a lot more even though it runs at slightly lower frequencies.

[LukaP]

 

I'm deciding on two different CPUs for a build. One is the Intel Core I5 4570 and the other is a AMD Athlon X4 760K. Both don't have any hyper threading and the AMD athlon is about .6 GHz faster while being almost 100 dollars cheaper. Why is the I5 so expensive while it has less speed then the Athlon? Am i missing something? Thanks!

 

 

speed isnt just the GHz, its the IPC (instructions per clock/cycle). which intel has almost double. so the 4690k is much better, but depending on the use case, unneded

[Tedster]

 

CPU boss is junk and you should not link that.

 

 

The speed race isn't just about clock speed or even cores now.

Everything is about the amount of calculations per clock, per core - and any optimizations. Benchmarks are your best bet.

 

Here's a comparison of the two processors. Look at the bottom for benchmark results: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4570-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-760K

[typographie]

The i5 is much, much faster. Like twice as fast or more. The 760K is actually a rather low-end processor.

 

What you're missing is that the frequency (Hz) of the processor only describes one particular aspect of it's speed. It's a lot more complicated than that. The amount that the Core i5 can do within a clock cycle (1 Hz) is far superior.

 

You can only fairly compare processors based on clock speed if they're of the same architecture, such as a Core i5-4570 vs. Core i5-4690.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Here's a comparison of the two processors. Look at the bottom for benchmark results: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i5-4570-vs-AMD-Athlon-X4-760K

CPU boss is junk and you should not link that.

[Tedster]

CPU boss is junk and you should not link that.

*fixes my post according to your rules*

[LukaP]

CPU boss is junk and you should not link that.

this is much better

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/39

[Lord Pantaloons]

Clockspeeds cannot be compared between two completely different CPU's because of the differences between the architecture that the cores are built on. That's why a a single core on a 9590 is slower than a single core on a 4690k despite being clocked at 5Ghz compared to the boost clock of only 3.9Ghz on the 4690k.

[ClubGaming_]

Okay so not only GHz but IPC. So how do you find the IPC of a CPU?

[i_build_nanosuits]

Okay so not only GHz but IPC. So how do you find the IPC of a CPU?

you look for benchmarks...there is no other way to see how said architecture perform other than looking at results from syntetic and real life scenarios benchmarking...that way you can also see how the performance scale with the clockspeed.

Your best bet is to tell us your budget, location, and the purpose of the purchase...what do you need us to shop for you and we'll get you there...you have a bunch of teck enthousiasts in here ready to help you out.

[typographie]

Okay so not only GHz but IPC. So how do you find the IPC of a CPU?

 

"IPC" is a nebulous concept rather than a solid numerical measurement. As nanosuits said, the only accurate way to compare processors is to see how they perform relative to one another, preferably in real-world benchmarks rather than synthetics. It's more useful to know that one is faster than the other, and that IPC is one of the reasons for that.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k/3

Here's an example of some good benchmarks, from Anandtech's review article for the launch of the Core i5-4690K.

[i_build_nanosuits]

"IPC" is a nebulous concept rather than a solid numerical measurement. As nanosuits said, the only accurate way to compare processors is to see how they perform relative to one another, preferably in real-world benchmarks rather than synthetics. It's more useful to know that one is faster than the other, and that IPC is one of the reasons for that.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k/3

Here's an example of some good benchmarks, from Anandtech's review article for the launch of the Core i5-4690K.

great and OP this is your lucky day this happens to be PERFECT benchmarking for you to look at because the athlon 760K that you are looking at perform very similar to the AMD A10-7850K APU that was used in this set of benchmarks...so that should give you a good idea.

[rtpb5642]

i5 is better.