The processor industry does not stand still, as, in principle, and information technology in general. Over the past fifteen years, humanity has achieved a revolutionary breakthrough in the computer field. As for processors, today developers present us with a huge selection of their products with the latest micro architectures and technologies. We just have to adjust to our financial capabilities. When buying a computer, the question arises, which processor to choose AMD or Intel?
In this article, I will try to reveal the answer to a frequently asked question, based not on personal preferences, but only on facts and examples. Anyone can support my opinion, or deny it. So, if you're ready, let's go.
Let's go back a little bit. Two companies, Advanced Micro Devices and Intel Corporation, were formed in 1969 and 1968. Just imagine, both megacorporations have almost half a century of experience in creating central processing units. These two sides have been competing with each other from the time of their founding to this day, and this is not surprising. With all this, in spite of everything, the two companies are on a par with each other. However, among ordinary users the name Intel is better known for some reason than AMD. At that time, processors were created with a clock speed of 3 MHz and an 8-bit bus. We are interested in modern processors with higher parameters.
Fables of AMD
Friends, probably many of you have heard the myths about "hot" and "not overclocked" AMD processors. Today it is stupid to say that AMD is very hot or not overclocked, because this statement is based on ordinary rumors. Yes, in the 2000s, Athlon 1400 processors were warming up, and if a cooler broke down, they burned out altogether. But now it's the beginning of 2016 and modern AMD processors are equipped with good thermal protection.
Do not forget that the thermal regime, in addition to the central processor itself, can be influenced by various factors:
- poor quality applying thermal paste;
- trash in the cooling cooler;
- the presence of a large amount of dust;
- not a working block food, etc.
With regard to overclocking. Today, some AMD processors set world overclocking records, so the opinion that they “do not overclock” is no longer relevant. There are also processors of the "Black Edition" series, in which the manufacturer has already provided an opportunity for overclocking.
So, with the fables about AMD processors, I think it's clear. Now a few words about Intel. I personally have not heard negative reviews for these processors. Even then, when Athlons were "baked" for Intel Pentium responded quite positively. Remember, there was also the phrase “What is your stump?”, That is, Pentium, and whoever had a Pentium-4 was generally cool.
Intel vs AMD clash of the titans
To be honest, there is no concrete universal answer to the question "which is better than intel or amd", since each user has his own needs, because a simple "user" needs one thing, and a gamer with experience is completely different. Each of the companies releases new generation processors almost every year. Today Intel can lead, releasing processors with a modified architecture, and tomorrow, for example, AMD will release a new generation architecture, taking first place. "Battles" of the two corporations have been and will be, and this is not surprising, because each of them wants to attract the attention of users with their central processing units with individual unique features.In the processor area, there is such a pattern: the more expensive a product is within the framework of one manufacturer, the more powerful, better and faster it is. However, AMD processors, as a rule, have always been cheaper than products from Intel. For myself, I came to the conclusion: if you have little or a pity for money - take AMD, if finances are not a problem, then - Intel. For the latter, you will give more money and you will get a slightly better product. As for reliability, both products cannot break, like, for example, a monitor or hard drive, and will last for many years, provided that they are not subjected to constant overclocking.
Positive and negative sides of AMD and Intel
AMD processorsPros:
- perfect ratio performance and prices;
- affordable price for all segments of the population;
- the ability to control the voltage in the cores of the microprocessor;
- almost any AMD processor accelerates up to 20%;
- multitasking (you can easily work in several demanding programs and not notice the strain on the computer);
- AMD's multiplatform nature makes it possible to replace old processors with new ones without changing the motherboard. Competitors in this regard are lagging far behind.
Minuses:
- Significantly high power consumption;
- Applications created for Intel do not work well on AMD computers;
- within the "FX" series, the native cooler (standard) is not enough, a more powerful cooling system is needed;
- performance in computer games is slightly worse than that of Intel, however, there is a significant difference in price.
Intel processors
Pros:
- good performance when working in a resource-intensive program, provided that it is running alone (converters, archivers, photo and video editors, games, etc.);
- performance in games is higher than that of competitors, but not significantly;
- work with RAM is better than that of AMD processors;
- energy consumption is lower;
- a large number of games and programs are optimized for stones from Intel;
Minuses:
- when working in two powerful programs Intel processors are not performing well;
- exorbitant price;
- when it appears new line processors, then both the motherboard and other components must be replaced;
- processors with the letter "K" get significantly hot, so you need to install good cooling for them;
- from previous paragraph it follows that upgrading your computer will lead to significant costs, since you will have to purchase not only a processor.
Of the positive and negative sides two leaders AMD and Intel, it is difficult to say which of them takes the 1st place. Each processor has its own characteristics and is good in its own way.
Core i7-3770K and FX-8350 processor test
To test two giants in practice, I took two processors for the test:- AMD processor on the new architecture FX-8350 (Vishera, 8 MB cache of the 3rd level, socket AM3 +, 4.0 GHz, overclocking to 4.4 GHz);
- from Intel processor Core i7-3770K ( Ivy bridge, 8 MB L3 cache, 3.5 GHz, overclocked to 4.4 GHz).
To make everything fair, when testing these processors, an Asus Sabertooth motherboard was taken. By the way, Intel's product is more expensive.
Test results:
From the tests, we can conclude. AMD processor has an acceptable cost and fairly good performance, but it consumes more power. The competitor has low power consumption and outperforms in performance. But at the same time, the price for Intel is much higher.
As I said, each processor of both giants has its own characteristics, disadvantages and advantages. Personally, I would choose an AMD processor, and for the remaining money I would buy a solid cooling system or add some more money and replace the video card. But, if money is not a problem, then get Intel. That's all, friends!
Also this question is covered here
The processor industry is no less dynamic than the rest of the information technology industry. The constant improvements of the latest microarchitectures and the release of new ones, although they did not make revolutionary breakthroughs at the beginning of 2016, gave you and me a wider choice within certain classes of central processors.
Once again, we will discuss which of the processors is better - Intel or AMD, and also compare processors for a system under different tasks... I must say right away that the opinion in this article is subjective and can be either supported or refuted by any person and without consequences. This article will not protect one side or the other, everything will be based on the real state of affairs in the world market for central processors.
In addition, let's touch on the mobile solutions segment a little. Specific answers for systems for certain types of tasks will be given in the conclusions, I advise you to hold out and read to the end.
For convenience and quick transition, the content of the article is given:
AMD vs Intel. A short historical introduction
So let's go. Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices were founded at about the same time: 1968 and 1969, respectively. That is, both companies have vast experience behind both in the production of processors and in competition with each other. But for some reason, among ordinary "users" Intel is much better known. And even in some antediluvian technical educational institutions they study in detail the old i8080 processor, which is sore for all technical students. AMD at this time simply released clones of 8080 in the form of Am9080 processors. And the first successful AMD processor of its own design can be called the Am2900 processor.
Okay, let's not talk about sad old processors with frequency at 3 MHz, performed by process technology 6 µm and equipped with an 8-bit data bus. Better yet, we will slowly move directly to the topic of our discussion, and to modern processors with more joyful characteristics.
AMD myths
I would like to dispel the myths about "burning" and "non-overclocking" AMD processors right away. To date, such statements are based on "naked" rumors. About ten years ago, there were many precedents for the failure of Athlon 1400 processors, which simply burned out after the cooler cooling the processor heatsink failed. Yes, then it was relevant, but talk about it when it's 2015 and AMD processors are equipped with excellent technology thermal protection is simply blasphemy.
And the thermal regime depends on various factors, and not only on the processor itself, for example, the factors of influence can be the efficiency of the processor cooler, as well as the quality applying thermal paste... Regarding overclocking, I will not say much and cite specific processor models, but simply state the fact that there are Black Edition processors on sale, which are aimed at overclocking by the manufacturer itself. Likewise, with the new FX from AMD, they not only proved to be suitable for good overclocking, but also boast world records in overclocking.
The negative myths about AMD are over, and now we can remember about Intel as well. There seemed to be no negative myths about Intel. In those days, when Athlones were on fire, one could only hear flattering reviews about the Pentium. This processor was known and revered by many, and even now to the question: "What kind of computer do you have?" Sometimes you can hear a proud answer -"Pentium".
2016 year. Comparison of the main lines of processors from AMD and Intel
I will sharply declare that as of 2016, among AMD and Intel, one can confidently single out the clear leader of the processor hit parade. And based on this article, you will be able to select and buy a processor, indeed, taking into account all your needs. If, in the article which video card is better we could not single out a large-scale leader, then everything is a little clearer here. But this leader will be voiced with rather generalized notes, since the specifics of the working and budgetary sphere nobody canceled, but more on that later.
In this subsection of the article, we will go through the main lines of processors from two companies and analyze their work under various types of loads, and already in the conclusions, as promised, there will be recommendations for choosing a processor for certain tasks. Accordingly, taking into account specific tasks, the advantage of certain processors will change significantly.
The description and resolution of the dilemma "which is better: amd or intel" should be approached comprehensively and from different viewing angles, because an ordinary consumer needs one thing, and an avid gamer or overclocker needs something completely different. I must say right away that the answer will be dynamic, and I will try to update the article as radically new processor lines from both companies appear, because this year one is leading, and the next is the other.
Let's start a little from afar. When Intel quietly and peacefully continued to release good and quality processors, the ruler was born AMD Athlon 64 with modified K8 microarchitecture. It was after the appearance of these processors that many started talking about AMD, and many even left Intel at that time. Several years ago there were more or less equal "battles" Phenom processors on K10 with corresponding Intel Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad models. During these periods, the widespread opinion appeared that AMD processors in the middle and budget price range outperform Intel in terms of price / quality ratio. For AMD, everything seemed to be going very, very well, but then the Nehalem microarchitecture appeared, which dealt a significant blow to AMD and revolutionized the processor market.
Core i3 / i5 / i7 on Sandy Bridge began to be actively bought up, raising Intel higher and higher over AMD. A little later, Intel turned the heat into a fire with the release of its second generation Sandy Bridge processors. They turned out to be no less successful than their predecessors: many people fell in love with the i5-2400, 2500, i7-2700, and for good reason. Let's not delve into microarchitecture, I will just say that Intel developers have thoroughly modified it, adding many different technologies and features.
A little time passed, and Intel announced the third generation processors - Ivy Bridge. The processors intel core i5-3570K, i7-3770K and many others did not go unnoticed, although they cannot boast of significant improvements. But given the fact that the prices for Ivy and Sandy Bridge are not separated by a chasm, it would be more reasonable to buy a slightly more accurate Ivy Bridge.
What did AMD do at this time? AMD calmly continues to refine the K10 microarchitecture, gradually adding frequencies to the Phenom. Although AMD Phenom II 9xx processors look very good on the processor market, due to their capabilities and price, they are already morally outdated and it is quite difficult for them to compete with new Intel products.
Then a line of AMD Llano APUs is announced, with a stake on integrated graphics directly on the processor die. The solution is quite interesting, considering that the Llano graphics show good performance, but in computational tests, these hybrid chips show the result of dual-core Intel Core i3-2100. Some of the options for saving on a video card will be to their liking, especially since the savings are significant and Llano processors will be marked by us in the results as interesting a budget option... In addition, a newer line of A-series processors was released - these are Trinity processors, they offer more powerful graphics than Llano, which looks even more delicious for home systems entry level... Trinity graphics are rightfully considered the best in the world among the integrated on a chip processor.
In the top segment, things did not go very well. Everyone was looking forward to the enchanting departure of the legendary processors on the Bulldozer architecture. Everyone was waiting for a revolution in the processor market, and instead a crude 8-core product was born. In addition, these 8 cores are not entirely complete, since the developers combined every two cores in the Bulldozer microarchitecture into 1 module, which can be compared (conditionally) with one core of the Ivy Bridge processors. But I would like to emphasize once again that this comparison is very conditional, since from the types of tasks this very convention can be smashed to smithereens both in favor of Intel and AMD.
Then the revision of Bulldozer was announced - Vishera processors with microarchitecture Piledriver - which, according to AMD representatives, gives an increase in the region of 10-15%, while having a lower TDP and all this is supported by a very tempting price.
Of course, it should be noted that both Bulldozer processors and, in particular, their improved version - Vishera– show excellent results under multi-threaded load, this is clearly seen in the 3d max working tests:
Less is better
The FX8350 beats the i7-3770K. Roughly the same situation will be observed in all applications that can create 8 high-quality streams, that is, in most packages for working with graphics, as well as in any other types of complex calculations. If you analyze the results, you can see that the gap from the i7-3770K is insignificant, but given the approximate prices of these models - $ 340 for the i7-3770K and $ 209 for the FX-8350, I think questions about a more profitable processor for these types of tasks should be filmed. Also, the even cheaper FX-8320 will be of interest for these tasks.
But when a single-threaded load falls on the processor, then due to the same unfinished microarchitecture, the bulldozer often loses to opponents from Intel. Those same games typically cannot load more than four cores, which as a result flaunts the disadvantages of Bulldozer cores in isolation. AMD Vishera processors slightly corrected the situation, but the lag is still noticeable. For clarity, I will give a few game tests:
Of course, the gaming load falls to a greater extent on the video card, but the processor is also an equally important link here. Moreover, games that are quite demanding on processor resources often slip through.
The sample of the given tests is too small, but the general trend of test results both on domestic and foreign sites is exactly the following: it is clearly seen from the tests that the i5-3570K confidently bypasses the opponents from AMD in the face of the new FX-4300, FX-6300 and FX-8350.
Starting in 2015, the Sunnywell company AMD, on which there was practically no hope in terms of innovations, of course, announced the introduction of a new line, referred to as Carrizo. The representatives agreed that Carizzo is the sixth generation, but why the little-known Brazos is not included in the account is not clear. Well, okay, it is worth highlighting the following points of this sensational line presented in Germany.
- Carizzo is placed exclusively on one crystal, and before that south bridge and the graphics chip were located on two crystals. The functionality of the device is based on 28 nanometers by the Global Foundries process.
- The four cores are of the Excavator architecture. The processor frequency was raised by only 1 MHz, compared to the previous Steamroller, so the processing performance per core, alas, increased slightly, but in general, everything is not so bad - an increase of around 15%, while maintaining the previous principles of data processing in general ...
- The graphic side has also been updated. In particular, the graphics core received 512 KB of L2 memory. There are significant performance improvements when matched with tessellation, and most importantly, color rendering is lossless.
At the same time, Intel did not skimp on the creation and release of a new generation of processors, which were named Broadwell. And it should be noted right away that every fan of the Intel team was disappointed. The processor is a base from Haswell, made on a 14nm process technology. The functionality of the cores and the microarchitecture did not receive any changes, so the desktop Broadwell turned out to be not good, to put it mildly.
Of the advantages, one can single out a decrease in heat dissipation. The integrated graphics core Iris Pro 6200 has also been added. These are, perhaps, all the main important additions to the processor from Intel.
But if we consider in general, for the majority of games, then AMD processors are also doing quite well.
In these tests, the main thing for us is not the FPS specifics of the two games, but the general tendency for FX processors to lag behind in games. In the conclusions, we will note this fact, which will go to AMD's liability.
Laptop CPUs
Intel is already enough long time reigns supreme in the segment of processors for laptops, and reigns very solidly. In both budget and top-end laptops, Core ix processors flaunt, which we touted a little higher.
The release of Llano processors did not change the alignment of forces very much, but brought some variety to the budget segment of laptops. But the Trinity processors can be called a really good attack from AMD. Even more powerful integrated graphics at an affordable price, and these processors also support the technology Dual Graphics. This technology Allows the integrated graphics of Trinity processors to work in conjunction with a discrete adapter. As a result, the bundle "Trinty integrated graphics + discrete Radeon HD 7670M" looks very attractive, given the total graphics performance and low cost.
We can safely say that in the budget segment of laptops, AMD Trinity A4 and A6 series are very interesting for the buyer, as they guarantee more powerful graphics than integrated graphics in Intel processors.
In the middle mobile segment, the A10 processors paired with the HD 7670 will also delight their graphics performance... But already in the fight against certain Core i5s, they will have problems on the computational front. With all this, the middle class of notebooks remains subject to tough competition and many will opt for the A10 + HD 7670. So in the middle and budget segment it is not so easy to determine which processor is the best for a notebook.
Coming back to the same Carrizo from AMD, which was released in 2015, it is worth noting that the system already has an integrated UVD-6 video decoder. Thanks to this decoder, it became possible to view video in H.264 and H.265 formats. As announced by the Carrizo manufacturers, this is the world's first laptop chip to be capable of H.265 decoding.
Intel also does not sleep on the issue of graphics for laptops, but significantly lags behind AMD, oddly enough, it might sound. So, a test was carried out in which Carrizo from AMD and Broadwell from Intel competed, which played 4K video in HEVC format... The results were stunning, when playing video the laptop with AMD-shny Carrizo did not load the processor even half, while its competitor Inrel was loaded at 80, and sometimes even 100%.
Thus, if back in 2013 Intel was in the lead, the situation for 2015 has changed somewhat, and now a self-respecting user will prefer a laptop with higher graphics performance running Carrizo processors from AMD.
I would like to note that the purchase of a high-performance laptop is a very controversial thing, I advise you to read the article “ laptop or desktop pc”, Which will not let you stumble on this deceptive front.
Okay, let's not get hung up on laptop processors, but rather move on to conclusions.
AMD vs Intel - Which Processors Are Better? conclusions
It remains to summarize small results in the battle between AMD and Intel.From the last of the above, everything becomes clear, but let's judge objectively, because everyone has the right to make a mistake, and we will believe that this mistake will be worked out. Let's pay attention to the class of tasks performed by these processors in order to judge fully in the end.
A processor for a budget system with undemanding tasks
To begin with, let's answer that amd or intel is better in the budget segment of the market. Budget systems are fairly widespread. These can be both home computers and office systems where the boss tries to buy a fleet of cars for the price of one normal system configuration.
Here, it seems to me, it is worth giving the advantage to AMD. The same new Trinity, for example the A4-5300 for $ 50-60, will look great in budget home systems, especially when trying to load the system. graphics tasks such as games. Or at worst, you can equip the system with the cheapest Llano, for $ 40.
For an office park, Trinity machines will also be a good solution, but here they are squeezed by the Pentium G, since in computing tasks they show a higher level of performance due to the second generation Sandy Bridge architecture and a slightly larger volume cache memory.
AMD-shnaya Carrizo 2015 will be a great solution not only for home use, but it may well take pride of place among office machines. But AMD's main goal was to release a completely new processor that will satisfy the functionality needs of notebooks.
Intel's company with Broadwell, which has become an "unloved child", is losing ground to AMD in many ways. So, in particular, although Broadwell is stuffed with a powerful graphics core Iris Pro 6200, the functionality at the level of office calculations is poor. Broadwell is not far from Sandy Bridge, which really handles computational tasks up to the mark.
So for an office car park good choice there will be a budget Intel Pentium G processor on Sandy Bridge, released in 2013, or a new work by Carrizo in 2015 from AMD.
Gaming Computer Processor
Class gaming computers most comprehensive because it covers as average? and the top segment of processors, there is no place for integrated graphics, and systems are usually equipped with high-performance video cards, which just take over the bulk of the work in games. But a lot also depends on the processor, since no one has canceled the balance in the system.
From the previously analyzed test results, we can confidently say that Intel is needed for an average gaming system. If you are not sorry to overpay a little, and at the same time you want to get some groundwork for the next year or two in most games, then it is Core i5 on Ivy Bridge that will in most cases be the most the best option than any of the Vishera. By no means do I want to say that Vishera is absolutely not suitable for games. Due to its price, the same FX-6300 will be a very good option for an inexpensive gaming system, although here it is pressed by the Core i3.
But the championship for gaming loads and a home system like "for all tasks" is still behind Core i5, as the mainstream version can be called Core i5-3570 or i5-3470 ... In especially extreme gaming options, the Core i7 will be an even more advanced solution, but at this stage in the development of the gaming industry and in the classic use case, its performance is in most cases excessive.
So, for a good gaming system, Intel core i5 is recommended (in some cases, i7), and for a cheaper gaming system, the FX-6300 is a good fit - here you need to look at secondary tasks and, starting from them, give priority to one or another option.
A processor for computationally intensive work
Processing and encoding video / audio, work in complex graphics applications as well as any other kind of complex computational work or work in entry-level servers - all this can often be divided into many threads.
As we said earlier, multithreading is the FX-8350's strong point. At its low cost, this processor shows the level of i7-3770K, and sometimes bypasses it in the above types of tasks. Therefore, for workloads, if you do not want to waste extra funds - only the FX-8350.
Of course, if you have extra funds, you can overpay and get a universal i7-3770K, both for work and for games, which will also be a reasonable option, but still, according to the well-known price / performance ratio for complex computing tasks FX- 8350 confidently bypasses opponents from Intel.
Also, do not forget about the "hard-solution" from Intel, in the form of the same Core i7-3970X. This processor is the best desktop option: it can do anything and is better than everyone else, but there is only one thing it cannot - be cheap, its cost is about $ 1000. An impeccable extreme option for those who like to throw money.
Processor options listed here for different types tasks are very generalized and cannot accurately reflect each individual case, where minor, but no less important tasks can arise, and the budget for the purchase can have a significant impact.
If we talk about financial side question, the AMD-shny Carrizo processor is included in the price range from 350 to 750 US dollars, which is due to the category of application. Accordingly, laptop processors are relatively more expensive than desktop processors, so again you have to choose according to the accumulated budget. But it is worth noting that the Carrizo, based on eight graphics and four processor cores, in addition has a technology to optimize the work with a power supply of 15 W. Thanks to this, the new device works 2.4 times faster than the previous generation Kaveri.
The minimum cost of Intel processors in 2015 is $ 380, which does not at all correspond to the parameters that are inherent in Broadwell. In particular, the main role in terms of cost was determined by the graphics core last generation Iris Pro 6200; in a slightly improved microarchitecture, which simply improved the predecessor Haswell, as well as a high rate of heat dissipation. And this, perhaps, is all that Intel can boast about its latest work.
Here is a comparison of processors and the answer to the question: "Which processors are better, Intel or AMD?"
Perhaps there are some controversial points, I will be very happy about your corrections or additions in the comments, but without a holivar and offensive bias.
Finally, we would like to wish AMD to soon pleasantly surprise us with the Streamroller microarchitecture, and also try to give a worthy rebuff to Intel, because we do not need a monopoly and inflated prices.
We wish Intel to reduce the prices of its processors and continue to release the same good, powerful and quality products.
And to you, dear friends, I wish you stable operation of the "hearts" of your computers, regardless of who and when they were released. All the best!
Assembling a computer can be very difficult, especially if you are inexperienced in such tasks. Exists great amount components you can use, but it is important to choose compatible components that will give you the best performance.
The central processing unit is one of the most important components of a computer, and this is where all calculations are performed. It controls the operation of all other components, so it is important to choose the correct option. On the this moment you have devices from two manufacturers: AMD or Intel processor. These companies make virtually every PC processor in the world. But they are quite different from each other. In this article, we will look at how these processors differ so that you can choose which processor is better than amd or intel in 2016.
Before diving into the detailed specs of the processor and technology, let's get back to basics and see how both companies got their start.
Intel appeared a little earlier than AMD, it was created by Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore in 1968. Initially, the company was engaged in the development of integrated circuits, then it was engaged in the production of processors. The first processor was Intel model 8008. Back in the 90s, the company became largest manufacturer processors. And he still continues to invent and introduce new technologies.
Ironically, AMD or Advanced Micro Devices was created with the support of Intel. The company was founded a year later - in 1969 and its goal was to develop microcircuits for computers. In the first Intel time supported AMD, for example, by providing licenses for the use of technologies, as well as financially, but then their relationship soured and the companies became direct competitors. Now let's move on to the processors themselves and their characteristics.
Price and performance
Both Intel and AMD offer processors in a wide price range. But AMD processors are cheaper. The cheapest are AMD Sempron and Athlon, these A-series dual-core processors start at $ 30. The Intel Celeron G1820 dual-core processor is slightly more expensive at $ 45. But that doesn't mean that AMD's chips are definitely better. Intel is known to provide better performance for the same price. You get a more powerful processor if you choose Intel's Celeron, Pentium, or Core. If we compare amd and intel 2016, then the former consume less energy, generate less heat, and more high performance confirmed by many tests.
But there are a few exceptions to this rule, AMD sells quad-core processors much cheaper than Intel, for example, you can get the A6-5400K for as little as $ 45. If you are using software that needs a lot of cores but cannot afford an Intel Core i5, then AMD is a better option for you. The same is true for the eight-core AMD FX series processors, they are much cheaper than the Intel Core i7.
AMD chips also provide the best integrated graphic cards... For example, the AMD A10-7870K allows you to play most games in low details and resolutions up to 1080p. Of course, this is not a game card, but it beats everything. Intel cards HD Graphics, so if you want to play on budget device then it is better to choose AMD.
Overclocking the processor
Most processors have a fixed clock frequency and it is set at a level that ensures that the processor will run the most stable and longest possible. Users who want more performance overclock the processor by increasing its frequency.
AMD supports overclocking much better than Intel. You can overclock cheap processors for $ 45 or more expensive ones for $ 100. As for Intel, here you can overclock processors of only one category - Pentium, for $ 70. It is well suited for this task and can be overclocked from a base frequency of 3.2 GHz to 4.5 GHz. AMD processors, FX series with a frequency of 5 GHz, support overclocking up to 13 GHz, although this requires special cooling.
Actually budget processors Intel is not designed for overclocking, but AMD is quite suitable. If you are looking to overclock AMD is a great choice. There are several high-end Intel chips with eight or ten cores. They are much faster than AMD chips. But AMD has a lot of power headroom, so they dominate overclocking. You won't find anything faster for home use.
Gaming performance
Gaming is one of the most basic areas where you need a powerful processor. AMD has several processors that come with an integrated graphics card ATI Radeon... They offer excellent value for money. Intel also has such solutions, but if we compare intel and amd processors, then its performance is lower.
But there is one problem, AMD processors are not as fast as Intel, and if you compare AMD vs Intel, then Intel can behave better in heavy games. Intel Core i5 and i7 will perform much better in games if you use a good external graphics card. The difference between amd and intel processors is that Intel can produce 30-40 more frames per second.
Energy efficiency
The confrontation between AMD and Intel, or rather, AMD's attempts to keep up with Intel is much worse than it looks. Both companies are holding up well, but the processors should use a lot less power. Let's try to compare intel vs amd processors.
For example, Intel Pentium G3258 consumes 53 watts, the same is consumed by A6-7400K from AMD. Nevertheless, in the tests, the Intel chip is faster in many aspects, sometimes by a wide margin. This means that the chip from Intel will run faster with less power, so AMD will generate more heat and, as a result, generate more noise.
If the question is which processor is better than amd or intel for a laptop, then energy efficiency is even more important, because it directly affects battery life. Intel processors last longer, but Intel hasn't pushed AMD out of the laptop market. AMD processors with integrated graphics are found on laptops over $ 500.
conclusions
AMD and Intel have been fighting for two decades, but Intel has begun to gain the upper hand in the past few years. The new Pentium processors have slowly ousted AMD at various price points.
If you're on a budget, then Intel obviously will the best solution... This will hold true if your budget allows you to purchase an Intel Core i5. AMD cannot compete with Intel in terms of performance, according to at least, bye.
If your budget is small, then perhaps you should look towards AMD, here the performance loss is compensated by the increase in the number of cores. Such processors cope with some operations faster, for example, AMD encodes video faster.
If we compare intel and amd processors in 2016, then Intel are more energy efficient, therefore they produce less heat and noise. For ordinary computer these features are not so important, but for a laptop, efficiency is very important.
But with AMD all is not lost, in 2017, the company is going to release a new architecture - Zen. By available information it is very promising. If you still want to buy AMD, then it is worth waiting for the release of Zen.
Thus, the Intel processor is better than AMD, but in some situations the latter can perform excellently and overtake Intel. For the Linux operating system, the manufacturer of the processor does not really matter. This is exactly the component that is fully supported by the kernel. And which processor to choose AMD or Intel in 2016, in your opinion? Which is better amd or intel? Which one would you choose? Write in the comments!
To complete the video from 16 bit ago about Intel history vs AMD:
Let's see what are the main differences between the processors of the world leaders - Intel and AMD.
We will also consider their positive and negative sides.
Major CPU manufacturers
Everyone understands perfectly well that on the market computing technology there are two leading companies that design and manufacture the Central Processing Unit (central processing unit), or more simply, processors.
These devices combine millions of transistors and others logical elements, and are electronic devices the highest difficulty.
The whole world uses computers, the heart of which is an electronic chip either from Intel or AMD, so it's no secret that both of these companies are constantly fighting for leadership in this area.
But let's leave these companies alone and move on to ordinary user, before which there is a dilemma of choice - which is still preferable - Intel or AMD?
Say what you like, but there is no definite answer to this question, and there cannot be, since both manufacturers have huge potential, and their CPUs are capable of meeting the current requirements.
When choosing a processor for a device, the user primarily focuses on its performance and cost - relying on these two criteria as the main ones.
Most of the users have long been divided into two opposing camps, becoming ardent supporters of Intel or AMD products.
Let's consider all the weak and strengths devices of these leading companies, so that when choosing a certain of them, rely not on speculation, but on specific facts and characteristics.
Pros and cons of Intel processors
So what are the advantages of an Intel processor?
- First of all, it is very high performance and performance in applications and games, which are most optimized for Intel processors.
- Under the control of these processors, the system operates with maximum stability.
- It is worth noting that the memory of the second and third levels in Intel CPUs works at more high speeds than in similar processors from AMD.
- An important role in performance when working with optimized applications is played by multithreading, which is implemented by Intel in such CPUs as Core i7.
Pros and cons of AMD processors
- The advantages of AMD processors, first of all, are their affordability in terms of cost, which is remarkably combined with performance.
- A huge plus is the multi-platform, which allows you to replace one processor model with another without having to change the motherboard.
- That is, a processor designed for socket AM3 can be installed on socket AM2 + without any negative consequences.
- It should be noted and multitasking, with which many AMD processors do an excellent job, simultaneously performing work with three applications.
- In addition, the FX series processors have quite good overclocking potential, which is sometimes badly needed.
- The disadvantages of AMD's CPUs include higher power consumption than Intel's, as well as work at lower cache speeds of the second and third levels.
- It should also be noted that most of the processors in the FX line need to additional cooling, which will have to be purchased separately.
- And one more disadvantage is that fewer games and applications have been adapted and written for AMD processors than for Intel.
Latest connectors from Intel
Today, many of the leading CPU manufacturers are equipped with two current connectors. Have Intel they are as follows:
- LGA 2011 v3 is a combo connector that is focused on the online assembly of a high-performance personal computer for both servers and the end user. The key feature of such a platform is the presence of a RAM controller that successfully operates in multichannel mode. Thanks to this important feature, PCs with such processors offer unprecedented performance. It must be said that an integrated subsystem is not used within such a platform. Unlocking the potential of such chips is possible only with the help of discrete graphics. For this, only the best video cards should be used;
- thanks to LGA, you can easily organize not only high-performance computing system but also a budget PC. For example, socket LGA 1151 perfect for creating a mid-priced computing station, while at the same time it will have a powerful integrated graphics core of the Intel Graphics series and support DDR4 memory.
Latest AMD connectors
AMD is promoting the following processor sockets today:
- the main computing platform for such a developer is considered AM3 +... The most productive CPU is considered the lineup FX, which include up to eight compute modules. In addition, such a platform supports an integrated graphics subsystem... However, this is where the graphics core goes into the motherboard rather than being integrated into semiconductor crystals;
- most recent current AMD CPU socket - FM3 +... AMD's new CPUs are aimed at both entry-level and mid-range desktops and media centers. Thanks to this, the most modern integrated solution will be available to the average user for a fairly small amount.
Work Opportunities
Many people pay attention to the price of the processor first. It is also important for them that he can easily solve the tasks assigned to him.
So what can both organizations offer on this point? AMD is not known for its outstanding achievements.
On the other hand, this processor represents an excellent price / performance ratio. If you set it up correctly, you can expect stable operation without any complaints.
It is worth noting that AMD has managed to implement multitasking. Thanks to such a processor, various applications are easily launched.
With it, you can simultaneously install the game and surf the endless expanses of the Internet.
But Intel is known for more modest results in this area, which confirms the comparison of processors.
It will not be superfluous to pay attention to the possibility of overclocking, during which the performance of the AMD processor can be easily increased by twenty percent over the standard settings.
To do this, you just need to use additional software.
Intel beats AMD in almost everything except multitasking. In addition, Intel has work with
So choosing a motherboard and power supply should be much more careful in order to prevent freezes with insufficient power.
Intel vs AMD Power Consumption Graph The same story with heat dissipation. It is high enough for older models. As a result, the standard cooler can hardly cope with the increased cooling.
Therefore, when buying a CPU from AMD, you must additionally purchase high-quality cooling from any decent company. Keep in mind that quality fans are much less noisy.
Socket type and performance
We should also say about performance. After AMD acquired ATI, its creators were able to successfully integrate most of the graphics processing capabilities into the processor cores. These efforts have paid off successfully.
Those who use an AMD chip for games should have no doubt that they get good performance, which is much better than those of equivalent Intel chips (this is especially true for those who use a card with ATI graphics).
If it comes to a lot of multitasking, then it is better to opt for Intel, since it has HyperTreasing technology.
However, this advantage can only be used when software application able to support multitasking, that is, the ability to divide tasks into several small parts.
If the user needs a gaming processor, it is better to combine an AMD processor with a video card.
So there is a big difference between intel and amd processor sockets. When choosing suitable option, keep in mind the differences listed in this article. This will greatly simplify the selection of the appropriate option.
They are behind everything you do on your PC. That's why you need to find the right processor that suits your specific needs. Don’t pay for features you don’t need, don’t buy a processor that doesn’t do what you need.
If you've faced a feverish war between AMD and Intel as closely as we do, you probably already know that AMD and Intel are targeting different parts of the processor market. Intel focuses on higher clock speeds and efficiency while sticking to fewer cores. However, AMD is outmatched by the competitor by offering more processor cores to ensure maximum multi-threaded performance.
It should come as no surprise then that AMD had a great year in 2017 with Ryzen processors, especially high-end processors. And now that the second generation Ryzen processors have been released, it looks like 2018 will be another landmark year for AMD - especially if AMD continues to release quality processors and.
Even in the shadow of the devastating Meltdown and Specter excesses with Intel processors - which have been fixed - Intel is still growing steadily in categories outside of PC processors, which shows how much AMD Ryzen processors have impacted the market.
Fortunately, Intel has released a ton of new processors, including the much-anticipated ones, as well as a number of low-performance T-series desktop processors. That's not all, we are expecting Cannon Lake processors in 2019, most recently.
AMD also got its own issues to be addressed as Israeli security lab CTS issued its press release detailing the vulnerabilities modern processors AMD. AMD responded quickly, however, promising to fix these issues as soon as possible.
However, it is possible that AMD and Intel can coexist while serving completely different audiences, but in some places they come into direct competition. If you are not entirely sure which side your loyalty is leaning towards, below you will find out all the details of AMD versus Intel in the processor market.
| AMDVSINTEL: PRICE
It was assumed that the most profitable deals would be offered by AMD processors, which are obviously cheaper, but this is only because Red Team did great job at the entry level.
Now that Ryzen processors proved that AMD can rise to the high-end rung, the market has changed. Intel is now leading the way in the budget processor segment, and its $ 64 Pentium G4560 processor has much better performance than the AMD A12-9800 (around $ 6500).
—
Even among the chips of the current Intel generations holds a dominant position, offering 8th Gen Coffe Lake processors for just $ 117 for the Core i3-8100T.
Most of this is due to the reluctance of Advanced Micro Device to go beyond simply repeating the outdated Bulldozer architecture, for the sake of introducing the Zen standard, which is already represented by more expensive processors.
However, in the low-cost segment, Intel and AMD processors usually sell for similar prices. Then you cross the $ 1,000 threshold where things get tricky. High-end Intel processors now have 4 to 18 cores, while AMD can offer up to 16 cores.
And thanks to the recent price cuts, you can find the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G for $ 160 (about R10,000) and $ 105 (R6,300), respectively.
While it has long been known that AMD Ryzen processors will offer the highest performance at a lower price point, benchmarks have shown that Intel remains competitive.
If you can find them, it will cost $ 359 (RRP 21,500), while the less capable Ryzen 7 1800X costs $ 299 (RRP 18,000).
With this in mind, the price of CPUs fluctuates constantly. Wait a few months, and you will find that the one you were asking the price for fell significantly below the market price.
| AMDVSINTEL: PERFORMANCE
It used to be easier. Are you looking for the best performance? You just chose Intel, but now it's not that simple.
The Santa Clara-based maker is stable in performance benchmarks, but Intel processors also consume less heat, offer a blessedly low TDP, and are generally excellent across the board.
This is largely due to Intel's introduction of super-threads, which have been included in the company's processors since 2002. Hyperthreads keep existing cores active, preventing them from remaining unproductive.
And while AMD's concurrent multi-threading (SMT), introduced in Ryzen, is broadly similar to hyper-threading, Intel remains at the top when it comes to raw clock speeds. AMD, on the other hand, is looking to add more cores to its processors, with the manufacturer only recently tackling clock speeds.
Unfortunately, software must be written with this multi-core advantage in mind, which explains why Intel continues to lead the way in real world applications.
Fortunately, despite their reputation as hot AMD processors, the new Ryzen's have much lower thermal design point (TDP) ratings than AMD FX processors and APUs of the past. As long as you use a decent cooler, you don't have to worry about your Ryzen-powered computer going out in flames. However, thanks to the recently announced Intel T-Series desktop processors, AMD is in a state of competition when it comes to TDP ratings.
The situation is developing in the same way as in the mobile sector (notebooks), where AMD only recently came out. The flagship Ryzen 7 2700U (4-core, 2.2 GHz - 3.8 GHz) looks very promising compared to the Intel Core i7-8550U (4-core, 1.8 GHz - 4.0 GHz).
And now that we had the opportunity to test the Ryzen 7 2700X, we found AMD much more attractive when it comes to sheer performance, but in real-world benchmarks, Intel pushes ahead.
Featuring AMD RX Vega GL and GH GPUs to complement the processors Intel Kaby Lake G with the latest generation of NUCs, at this point AMD and Intel rivalry comes to a standstill. At this stage, the two companies are collaborating, which we have never seen before. Moreover, both companies benefit from the collaboration.
It is unclear how long the partnership will last. Since AMD recently launched theirs, you can now only get "discrete grade" graphics from AMD chips, which will inevitably lead to an increase in Ryzen-based laptops. Meanwhile, Intel has poached two important leaders of the AMD Radeon Graphics team, so it seems inevitable that the company will move into the discrete graphics world.
| AMDVSINTEL: GRAPHICS
If you're building a gaming PC, to be honest, you should be using a discrete graphics card instead of relying on onboard processor graphics to run demanding games like Middle Earth: Shadow of War.
However, the built-in graphics processor can run less demanding games. AMD is the clear leader in this area, thanks to the latest Ryzen 5 2400G, which includes Vega graphics, rapidly surpassing Intel integrated graphics.
However, as we mentioned earlier, Intel has officially started shipping its high-performance mobile H-series chips with AMD graphics on board. In turn, this means that powerful laptops on the Intel based will now be able to get thinner, and their silicon platform will be reduced by 50%, according to the vice president of the computing group at Intel, Christopher Walker.
All of this is achieved using Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge (EMIB) technology as well as an innovative new architecture that provides sharing performance between Intel processors and third-party graphics chips with dedicated graphics memory. However, it is still too early to tell whether the processor is the best choice over AMD's purebred laptop slated for later this year.
However, if all you want to do is play League of Legends on modest graphics settings, or plunge back into childhood with a full disk of emulators (ok, we won't tell you), the latest Intel Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake or AMD series APU A for desktop computers will likely be the same as any upcoming device as a mobile graphics solution.
At a high graphics level, such as when you are going to combine processor power with a powerful AMD or Nvidia graphics card, Intel processors are generally much better suited for gaming due to their high and stable base frequencies. At the same time, AMD provides superior processors for multitasking as a result of their increased number of cores and threads.
While there is no clear winner in the graphics department, the survey says AMD is the best option for integrated graphics, while hardcore gamers who don't want to spend extra money on a graphics card will find Intel is better suited for gaming alone. Meanwhile, AMD excels in several ways.
| AMDVSINTEL: ACCELERATION
When you buy a new computer or even separately CPU, it is blocked at a specific clock speed as indicated on the package. Some processors come with unlocked frequencies, which means they may have higher clock speeds than the manufacturer's recommendation, which gives the user more control over how they use their components (although you need to know how to overclock to do this).
AMD is more generous than Intel in this regard. With an AMD system, you can expect overclocking capabilities from $ 129 (RUR 7800). However, you will only be able to overclock an Intel processor if it bears the K-series approval mark. Again, the cheapest processor in this category is $ 149 for the Intel Core i3-7350K.
—
Both companies will void your warranty if you overclock your processor, however, so it's important to keep an eye on temperatures. Excessive heat can be generated if you are not careful, thereby destroying your processor. Keep in mind that you will be missing out on a few hundred megahertz if you miss one of the K.
Even more extravagant chipsets other than the K-series are impressive too. For example, the i7-8700K is capable of turbo frequencies of 4.7 GHz compared to the faster 4.2 GHz Ryzen 7 1800X. If you have access to liquid nitrogen cooling, you can hit up to 6.1 GHz with the monstrous 18-core Intel I9-7980XE.
| AMD VS INTEL: AVAILABILITY AND SUPPORT
In the end, the biggest problem with AMD desktop processors is the lack of compatibility with other components. In particular, the dimensions of the motherboard and cooler are limited as a result of the difference in connectors between AMD / Intel chips.
While many CPU coolers require you to use a dedicated AM4 mount for use with Ryzen, only one is compatible with the AM4 chipset. As such, Intel is much more mundane and often comes with lower start-up costs as a result of the wide choice of chipsets.
However, AMD chips make a little more sense in terms of hardware design. From the mother's AMD board, you will not find the metal connector pins on the processor socket, you will notice that these pins are located at the base of the processor itself. In turn, the likelihood of failure due to broken contacts is significantly lower.
In terms of availability, four months after the release date of Intel 8th Gen processors, both Intel Coffee Lake and AMD Ryzen processors are widely available from retailers. While graphics cards are seeing limited availability in stores due to the cryptocurrency boom, most processors can be found at or below their price tags.
These include everything from the Intel Core i7-8700K to the recently released AMD Ryzen 3 2200G and Ryzen 5 2400G. Even Intel's recently announced 8th Gen T-Series processors should hit the Internet any minute. Now we just have to wait for the 2nd Gen Ryzen processors to refresh the market again.
