About Amd cpu, help ?

[Powesedor (Pedro Pereira)]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

 

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

[Guest]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

 

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

Intel's cores are more efficient, its not always down to raw core amount and speed. Especially with Intel. Intel has constantly made improvements to they're CPU's where AMD hasn't done any high end CPU"s in a few years which is a long time in the PC world 

And the sockets they're on are 2-3 years out of date 

[techguru]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

 

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

cause there IPC is absolutly horrible

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_cycle

[Powesedor (Pedro Pereira)]

cause there IPC is absolutly horrible

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_cycle

 

What's IPC ?sorry but i'm really curious

[Yoinkerman]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

They're built differently.

[techguru]

What's IPC ?sorry but i'm really curious

clicki the link

[Gofspar]

4 modules and 8 "cores" see them as a beefy quad core.

[incarnate]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

First, amd doesn't have any eight core mainstream cpus. They have 4 module cpus. They run a clustered multithreaded architecture which can't always run two threads simultaneously on the same module.

Next the transistors are much larger than Intel's offerings I since ivy bridge.

Lastly, all the clock speed in the world isn't going to make up for the huge gap between what Intel cpus can process per ghz and what amd can process at the same speed.

Core count doesn't matter if most applications don't use more than 4 cores, and those cores are rarely at 100% usage for long periods of time. And clock speed only matters when looking at cpus from the same architecture.

[Nena Trinity]

Hi there, i just wanted to know why the hell AMD cpu's have more cores than an i5 for example, faster cores and still they have worst performance.

 

Are those 8 physical cores ? Why are they "not as good" as intel cores ?

Does speed still afect performance as it used to ?

8 cores but they are SHARING power but it is slow cores so lets say it like this the CPU has much power if all 4-8 treads are used but if not the slow cores are bottle-necked by the software and wont be optimal... (most likely reason if a game runs poorly)

[SImoHayha]

What's IPC ?sorry but i'm really curious

IPC would be like you biking.

 

A AMD CPU would require 8 pedals to go at 8 cycles per second

 

 While a Intel CPU needs 4 pedals to get 8 cycles per second.

 

So the Intel chip has more efficient cores  and thus more powerful compared to AMD's weaker cores.

[Sauron]

Because there's more to a core than clock frequency. Core i5 cores are about 90% faster than fx 8xxx cores. By your standard a 3.8ghz pentium 4 from 13 years ago would have a faster core than a 5960x, which is obviously nonsense.

[Prysin]

IPC would be like you biking.

 

A AMD CPU would require 8 pedals to go at 8 cycles per second

 

 While a Intel CPU needs 4 pedals to get 8 cycles per second.

 

So the Intel chip has more efficient cores  and thus more powerful compared to AMD's weaker cores.

except no...

 

intel i5 is performing around 30-50% in games, and depending on use case, much better, equal or worse depending on application...

If all 8 cores are used, i5 may be equal or worse. If less then 8 cores are used, i5 is much stronger. BUT, never more then 50% so, as the difference in IPC is around 45-50%... FX makes up for low IPC with much higher frequencies. So stock for stock, intel would in most cases only be 50% faster. With the exception of some WEB applications, where intel is way way way better....

[Prysin]

Because there's more to a core than clock frequency. Core i5 cores are about 90% faster than fx 8xxx cores. By your standard a 3.8ghz pentium 4 from 13 years ago would have a faster core than a 5960x, which is obviously nonsense.

nope, 90% is quite wrong. see my post above

[Sauron]

nope, 90% is quite wrong. see my post above

 

Not all performance is gaming performance. The increases you see in a gaming benchmark are only the effect of the fx's bottlenecking of the gpu. i5s on the other hand can usually support higher framerates than the gpu can render, meaning it is not used to its full potential (remember these are games, which aren't necessarily cpu intensive tasks. While playing a game you'll very rarely see the i5's usage spike to 100% on all 4 cores. In a rendering test like cinebench however it is clear that the performance of the two chips is pretty close, despite one of the two having twice the cores as the other. This is evidence that the other's cores are close to twice as fast.

 

 

Cinebench R11.5 64-bit, CPU test

• Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition (3.3GHz/4.7GHz)
• Intel Core i7-3930K (3.2GHz/4.7GHz)
• Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition (3.46GHz/4.6GHz)
• Intel Core i7-3770K (3.5GHz/4.8GHz)
• Intel Core i7-2600K (3.4GHz/5GHz)
• AMD FX-8350 (4GHz/4.8GHz)
• Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4GHz/5GHz)
• AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHz/4.818GHz)
• Intel Core i5-2500K (3.3GHz/5GHz)
• AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition (3.3GHz/4.2GHz)
• Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1GHz)
• AMD FX-8120 (3.1GHz/4.65GHz)
• Intel Core i7-920 (2.66GHz/4.04GHz)
• Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)

• • 11.29
  • 13.61
• • 10.15
  • 13.50
• • 9.28
  • 11.59
• • 7.91
  • 9.73
• • 7.49
  • 9.78
• • 6.92
  • 8.25
• • 6.32
  • 8.22
• • 6.01
  • 7.95
• • 5.93
  • 7.71
• • 5.86
  • 7.35
• • 5.15
  •  
    0.00
• • 5.04
  • 7.64
• • 4.82
  • 6.91
• • 2.97
  •  
    0.00

0

3

5.5

8

10.5

13

Score, higher is better

• Stock Speed
• Overclocked
•  
•  

 

notice how the core i3 is about half as fast as the core i5, because it has half as many cores that are similarly fast. A 4690k will yield slightly better results than this 3570k, but you get the point.