Amd compared to Intel

[Intubrew]

So I'm looking to either Build a PC or buy one. And was wondering why Quad-Core Intel Cpus are so popular when there are 6 and 8 core cpu's for similar prices.

 

For example, I can see a Quad-Core I5-6600K At 3.5 Ghz for £190 odd (Around 269$) and then I can see an AMD Fx-8350, 8 cores at 4Ghz outta the box for about £140 (198$)

In my eyes, the nonsensical cpu to buy is the I5, as it's got a slower clock speed, less cores, and is dearer.

I am fairly new to Computers, I'll be reading replies as there's probably something I'm missing...

Thanks

 

[Starelementpoke]

1 minute ago, Intubrew said:

So I'm looking to either Build a PC or buy one. And was wondering why Quad-Core Intel Cpus are so popular when there are 6 and 8 core cpu's for similar prices.

 

For example, I can see a Quad-Core I5-6600K At 3.5 Ghz for £190 odd (Around 269$) and then I can see an AMD Fx-8350, 8 cores at 4Ghz outta the box for about £140 (198$)

In my eyes, the nonsensical cpu to buy is the I5, as it's got a slower clock speed, less cores, and is dearer.

I am fairly new to Computers, I'll be reading replies as there's probably something I'm missing...

Thanks

 

Because the 6-8 core cpu's ipc suck ass, and there multi-threaded performance is matched by those 4 core ones.

[Fulgrim]

Architecture. 

AMD's currently available cpu architecture is old, and not as efficient/powerful as what Intel offer. And most games benefit from fewer, more efficient cores. 

[Reagan Reese]

 

[Aytex]

7 minutes ago, Intubrew said:

So I'm looking to either Build a PC or buy one. And was wondering why Quad-Core Intel Cpus are so popular when there are 6 and 8 core cpu's for similar prices.

 

For example, I can see a Quad-Core I5-6600K At 3.5 Ghz for £190 odd (Around 269$) and then I can see an AMD Fx-8350, 8 cores at 4Ghz outta the box for about £140 (198$)

In my eyes, the nonsensical cpu to buy is the I5, as it's got a slower clock speed, less cores, and is dearer.

I am fairly new to Computers, I'll be reading replies as there's probably something I'm missing...

Thanks

 

You cant just look at cores/speeds and think their all the same, All CPU versions are different and have different architectures 

Some stronger than others

[The Salt Is REAL]

21 minutes ago, Intubrew said:

So I'm looking to either Build a PC or buy one. And was wondering why Quad-Core Intel Cpus are so popular when there are 6 and 8 core cpu's for similar prices.

 

For example, I can see a Quad-Core I5-6600K At 3.5 Ghz for £190 odd (Around 269$) and then I can see an AMD Fx-8350, 8 cores at 4Ghz outta the box for about £140 (198$)

In my eyes, the nonsensical cpu to buy is the I5, as it's got a slower clock speed, less cores, and is dearer.

I am fairly new to Computers, I'll be reading replies as there's probably something I'm missing...

Thanks

 

AMD's CPU's don't perform as well / go as fast as Intel's CPU's. AMD's stuff is also super hot out of the box so less speed/lifespan because of that already. Like other people said their architecture sucks, Intel is just much more efficient and does a better job/goes faster. But AMD's are great for budget though, since Intel CPU's are usually a premium but i5's are usually pretty affordable

[mikat]

17 minutes ago, Reagan Reese said:

 

those are old intel cpus though

[The Salt Is REAL]

Like people said about architecture, Intel is a lot better.

 

For example, an Intel 5960X @3.0GHz actually does BETTER than a FX-9590 at 4.7GHz.

[Majestic]

2 minutes ago, Riki the Legendary Heropon said:

Like people said about architecture, Intel is a lot better.

 

For example, an Intel 5960X @3.0GHz actually does BETTER than a FX-9590 at 4.7GHz.

Bit of a skewed example. 5960X is 8C/16T

 

Not that it would matter much though.

[Starelementpoke]

2 minutes ago, Riki the Legendary Heropon said:

Like people said about architecture, Intel is a lot better.

 

For example, an Intel 5960X @3.0GHz actually does BETTER than a FX-9590 at 4.7GHz.

Dude, the 1231v3 does better. Heck, I think the 4690k does as well.

[Dabombinable]

 

28 minutes ago, Starelementpoke said:

Dude, the 1231v3 does better. Heck, I think the 4690k does as well.

5.3GHz FX 8320 & FX 8350, still slower singe threaded than my i5 4440 (3.1GHz base, 3.3GHz boost across 2 cores), and the i5 consumes less than a quarter of the 220W+ required by the FX 8320/8350.

[Starelementpoke]

2 minutes ago, Riki the Legendary Heropon said:

Like people said about architecture, Intel is a lot better.

 

For example, an Intel 5960X @3.0GHz actually does BETTER than a FX-9590 at 4.7GHz.

Dude, the 1231v3 does better. Heck, I think the 4690k does as well.