My Intel VS AMD thoughts (What do you think?) (Unbiased as I can be)

[jtmoseley]

1 minute ago, TofuHaroto said:

 

 

 

Real world performance is the actual thing to look at 

Eh its also 25 dollars cheaper. Pick your poison.

[GarbageCompactor]

3 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

My 2c:

 

Intel pros:

Better gaming

Better overclocking

Generally more mature technology

Generally more stable

Better resale

 

Intel cons:

Slower at multithreading 

Locked chips not great

More expensive

More heat

More security flaws

Less upgradability

 

AMD pros:

Better multithreading

Lower price and almost as good at gaming

Upgradability

Comes with decent cooling

Less security flaws

 

AMD cons:

Slower at gaming

Limited overclocking

Generally less mature technology

Generally less stable

Users often upgrades more frequently than needed

This is a great summary. Though you have to give AMD some credit on less mature technology since they only started their Ryzen lineup recently, and Intel has been working on their I series processors for over a decade. I would think AMD has security flaws too, but I would bet many of them are still hidden since Intel still has the majority of market share, though security flaws aren't a big deal for the average person, since most things don't take advantage of them. Servers and important things care about them though, since thats the main priority of attacks. AMD used to be the butt of jokes about heat, but now that Intel is really pushing the 14nm limit, its turning back on them. Again though, great summary.

[GarbageCompactor]

30 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Holy paragraphing, Batman!

Yeah, I probably should've formatted it better.

[KarathKasun]

2 minutes ago, jtmoseley said:

Can you link an example of this 20% increase over stock? I've never seen that before.

 

First, benchmarks...

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/2026-amd-ryzen-3-3300x-3100/

 

The 3300x doesnt get as much from an OC, its the 3100 that gains quite a bit.

 

 

[jtmoseley]

1 minute ago, KarathKasun said:

First, benchmarks...

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/2026-amd-ryzen-3-3300x-3100/

 

The 3300x doesnt get as much from an OC, its the 3100 that gains quite a bit.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh. But that isn't really real world at all. They used expensive memory didn't they? Why would you buy a cheap processor but expensive memory?

[KarathKasun]

1 minute ago, jtmoseley said:

Oh. But that isn't really real world at all. They used expensive memory didn't they? Why would you buy a cheap processor but expensive memory?

3600 is actually quite cheap.  3200 can usually be tuned to run at 3600 as well, and you just need memory clock higher to raise the FCLK.  Memory timings dont really matter much.

[jtmoseley]

1 minute ago, KarathKasun said:

3600 is actually quite cheap.

I guess? But if you're buying budget parts 25-75 dollars is a lot of money.

[KarathKasun]

3 minutes ago, jtmoseley said:

I guess? But if you're buying budget parts 25-75 dollars is a lot of money.

Gap is like... $15.  Timings do not matter.

 

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232731

 

My bad, no price difference from 3200.

[KarathKasun]

i5-9400f also gets edged out by the R5 3600 in 99% of situations.

 

the 10 series fixes this positioning quite a bit, but its just back to parity for the most part.