Can someone explain Intel-Ryzen

[Valancey]

Like what is the difference. Is there even a difference? Is there anything different or that I should think about? 

Your friendly tech interested swede!

[igormp]

Two different brands, pretty much like comparing a Ford to a Volvo. Each have their own product lineup and platform, usually with offerings that are similar in performance for each price bracket.

 

You'll need to look around and do some research to find out which product best fits your needs.

[Eigenvektor]

Both Ryzen CPUs (AMD) and Core CPUs (Intel) are 64-bit x86 CPUs. As such they can run the same applications (most users probably care about Windows, games, office and internet browsers). From that point of view there's no difference.

 

There can be differences in additional instruction sets (e.g. AVX-512), which can make a difference in performance in very specific scenarios, but generally not something the average user has to care about.

 

Other than that, there are always differences in performance and price. Both companies produce various models with different speed per core and number of CPU cores. That means there's a ton of possible usage scenarios to consider to determine which one is "best" for a specific user/use case.

[Ripred]

12 minutes ago, Valancey said:

Like what is the difference. Is there even a difference? Is there anything different or that I should think about? 

Your friendly tech interested swede!

The differences are subject to use case and budget

In general they both can do the same thing pretty well across the range of models, depending on use case and specific software within that use case one software may favor one over the other

AMD tends to be more favorable if you would prefer to just upgrade the chip rather than invest into a whole new platform when you would like to upgrade

Intel tends to be a little more friendly to the new builder who wouldn't have knowledge/experience dealing with bios/hardware configurations though recent years that line has blurred a bit

[RONOTHAN##]

1 minute ago, Valancey said:

Like what is the difference.

One's made by AMD, one's made by Intel. Because they're made by two different companies, there are some different design philosophies between there different chips, though realistically from a generally user's perspective they're practically the same. AMD, for instance, has been doing chiplets on their CPUs, meaning that instead of having one giant piece of silicon to hold the 16+ core CPUs they make they now how 2-3 different pieces of silicon, some with cores, others with IO functionality. Intel instead has been focused on maintaining the monolithic dies (one giant die basically), but to make up for their inherent core count loss has been making CPUs with hybrid architectures, meaning that some of the cores are a lot faster than each other. Both designs have their pros and cons, Intel's needs a lot of software optimization for their not to be weird issues or performance regressions in certain workloads that have not been fully implemented, while AMD's system results in a lot more latency between the core and things like RAM. 

 

It's like comparing 2 different cars. Yeah they've got differences, one has more power, another might have heated seats, etc., but practically speaking they'll both get you to and from work, and it just comes down to which set of the minor differences would be better for you.