AMD vs INTEL

[Teemo4Life]

Which one is better and why? I think Intel since it has better upgrades in the future and has hyper threading. I just like Intel overall. I only like AMD for the high cores and for starting builds like fx 6300 but I would rather get i3 4160

FRIENDLY DISCUSSION PLEASE!

[minibois]

Which one is better and why? I think Intel since it has better upgrades in the future and has hyper threading. I just like Intel overall. I only like AMD for the high cores and for starting builds like fx 6300 but I would rather get i3 4160

Pls don't start a flame war..

Generally for gaming, Intel is better

[Peter Vaughan Truslow]

Which one is better and why? I think Intel since it has better upgrades in the future and has hyper threading. I just like Intel overall. I only like AMD for the high cores and for starting builds like fx 6300 but I would rather get i3 4160

Intel is better due to lower power consumption, higher performance per core, per clock, per watt, and IMO per headache.

AMD is better due to higher performance per dollar sometimes, but most of the time it is a toss up. AMD also has heterogeneous crossfire with onboard graphics (CrossfireX)

 

overall I will continue to choose intel until AMD has a quantum leap in architecture and manages to get their chips on a fab at a similar process node to intel chips.

[The Pizza Thief]

Intel <3

[stconquest]

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Alinustechtips.com+FX+8350+vs+i5

[D3MON]

For now amd is better for me because its faster in the things i do for half the cost of an i5K
thanks for asking. YMMV

[PetiteBob]

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Alinustechtips.com+FX+8350+vs+i5

That is a lot of post about 2 chips

[D3MON]

-snip-

op created a thread that has been debated a billion times before to ask a question with no regards to use case purely based on brands with the sole purpose of posting what he believes is best (regardless of use case) and why.

I don't mind if i add my own (edited since) view for my use case then gaming, gaming while recording, editing, transcoding maybe streaming later? while on a not-limited but low-cost budget.

Edited February 25, 2015 by D3MON
snip

[UltraNeonGaming]

I will say this... Please pay attention. Just because Intel has "hyper threading" and AMD has more "cores" doesn't make any of the companions more superior, AMD's more "cores" are slower than Intel's less "cores".

Intel is worlds ahead of AMD in CPU architecture so Intel is " better".

This doesn't mean that AMD is bad, just because AMD has lost the CPU game doesn't mean that they aren't doing amazingly well in the GPU game.

Also, please can the world stop asking this question?

There is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more in a CPU than just "cores" and "clock speed" every CPU engineer must rip their hair out and eat their nails when someone says a CPU is better because it has more "cores" and a "higher clock speed" without even mentioning the architecture and the work that goes into a chipset.

You can not just fight over which CPU company is better without saying a single damn thing about use case and budget etc.

Hope that helps

[WoodenMarker]

Please stop with the off-topic replies guys. I've removed them.

Posts like 'flame war inc' aren't really helpful.

[harrynowl]

Copy/pasted a post I made from yesterday that may offer a little insight onto AMD/Intel in gaming:

 

On the CPU side, AMD CPUs are less expensive for their overall performance, but their real world application performance is often lacking- and an AMD platform can be quite expensive.

 

AMD "value" gaming build:

- FX6300

- Hyper 212

- Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 Rev4

 

Find here: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/22xGXL

 

So $255 without rebates, $235 with them.

 

Intel "value" gaming build:

- i5 4440

- ASRock H97 Anniversary

 

Find here: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/rZsFCJ

 

$256 before rebates, $241 after rebates.

 

So in terms of performance, the i5 wins in pretty much every scenario.

 

It's the same price, and you could save more and get a cheaper H81 or B85 board but I went for something with similar features like USB3.0 ports and SATA6G etc.

 

But if you're rendering videos, if you get that 6300 to a nice clock speed (i.e. 4.7GHz) it will be faster for CPU based rendering.

 

You can save money on the AMD and get a cheap board and no cooling, but you won't be overclocking (which is where most of AMDs value comes from in the low end) and you won't get much in the way of features or reliability.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Please stop with the off-topic replies guys. I've removed them.

Posts like 'flame war inc' aren't really helpful.

thread should have been locked long ago

 

For now amd is better for me because its faster in the things i do for half the cost of an i5K

 

...and for me it's INTEL because it's much faster for the things I do :huh:

 

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/dying-light-test-gpu.html

[D3MON]

thread should have been locked long ago

 

 

...and for me it's INTEL because it's much faster for the things I do :huh:

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/dying-light-test-gpu.html

exactly!!! (bad example btw an i3 within 1% of a 4770k)!

everyone does slightly different things, one size never fits all (thatswhatshesaid)

[DigitalHermit]

Both suck ballz... ARM FTW!!!/s!!!

 

Depends...low budget? AMD. High budget? Intel.

[Fate]

Both suck ballz... ARM FTW!!!/s!!!

 

Depends...low budget? AMD. High budget? Intel.

Intel is still better for low budget gaming, the only time AMD (cpu's) excels for 'low budget' is in rendering and a few other tasks that take very good use of all 8 8320 cores (not livestreaming/recording, there's plenty of ways to do that without wrecking your CPU, like QuickSync/GVR/ShadowPlay). 

I guess you could go 860k if your budget is REALLY low for a gaming rig, but that's about it. 

[dandrix]

Love both, but i use AMD, would love to own i7 Extreme someday tho

[DigitalHermit]

Intel is still better for low budget gaming, the only time AMD (cpu's) excels for 'low budget' is in rendering and a few other tasks that take very good use of all 8 8320 cores (not livestreaming/recording, there's plenty of ways to do that without wrecking your CPU, like QuickSync/GVR/ShadowPlay). 

I guess you could go 860k if your budget is REALLY low for a gaming rig, but that's about it. 

 

Considering that we're getting more and more multithreaded games on the market (no matter how BS the multithreading is...), I say I'll take either an i3 or an 860k (or equivalent APU) for baseline budget gaming...

[i_build_nanosuits]

exactly!!! (bad example btw an i3 within 1% of a 4770k)!

everyone does slightly different things, one size never fits all (thatswhatshesaid)

as you can see by the results that game is heavily dependent on how CPU1 processing core is performing like many other games...hence the reason why all the AMD CPU's perform so poorly in that game and in many other AAA titles as well.

[Analog]

Such treads have been discussed time and time over. I really think that they should be banned, since sooner or later eventually they end up being a complete mess filled with hateful and uneducated comments from people who are just repeating statements someone else said, most of the time taking them out of the context.  

 

Having said that I really can't see any truth particularly in the idea that AMD is a low budget brand, and Intel is only for "rich" people... AMD products are cheap, but you are getting what you paid for - particularly in the case of AM3(+) an outdated and power-hungry 5-year old platform with no other features other than a couple of USB 3.0 ports. As @Faceman has posted time and time over even with a lesser budget Intel makes more sense in the majority of the usage scenarios and first and foremost gaming. The only reason to buy AMD, imo, is if someone really wants a very cheap office system, which is still capable to run the occasional mainstream online game like DOTA 2 , Counter Strike, etc. However that would mean going for an APU. 

 

Now I know some may say I bias, but I am really not. My first system featured the Phenom II 1090T, which was an awesome processor. My problem with AMD is that they didn't really spend the time, money and efforts into rnd and kept strapping cores, which are not even fully fledged ones, while marketing them as such. The 1090T, that was a proper 6-core chip. the FX 6300, that is like a 3-core and 3-lesser core chip... Same goes for the FX 82XX.

 

Lets just say that when AMD comes out with something equally or at least remotely in the range of the 5960X, then we'll talk. 

[vembutech]

AMD is good as you said here have a look at this source intel vs AMD which may guide you with some idea.

[Nikolithebear]

IT HAS BEGUN.