Comparative processor performance. Intel vs AMD processors: analysis and comparison of models

This material will compare the processor products of two leading manufacturers of semiconductor chips: Intel vs AMD. Their current computing platforms will also be reviewed, their strengths and weaknesses indicated. Well, in addition to this, possible computer configurations will be given.

The main current x86 processor sockets

Today, each of the leading manufacturers of central processors has 2 current processor sockets. At Intel it is:

Socket LGA 2011-v3. This combined processor socket is aimed at assembling both high-performance personal computers for computer enthusiasts and servers. The key feature of this platform is the RAM controller, which can operate in 4-channel mode, and it is this important feature that provides unprecedented performance to processor products. It should also be noted that this platform does not use an integrated graphics subsystem. Only discrete graphics can unlock the potential of such high-performance chips, and the LGA 2011 - v3 processor socket is aimed precisely at using this class of computer components.

Socket LGA 1151. This computing platform allows you to organize both budget-level PCs and high-performance computing systems. In this case, the RAM controller can operate maximally in 2-channel mode. Also, almost every central processor in LGA 1151 is equipped with an integrated video card that will fit perfectly into an office or budget system unit. In terms of performance, this socket is inferior to the previously reviewed LGA 2011-v3, but outperforms any of the AMD solutions. Therefore, if we compare Intel i5 vs AMD FX-8XXX, then the advantage, both in productivity and in energy efficiency, will be with the products of the first company.

In turn, AMD is actively promoting the following processor sockets today:

The main computing platform for this developer of microprocessor devices is AM3+. The most productive CPUs within its framework are FX chips, which can include from 4 to 8 computing modules. The RAM controller in AM3+, as in LGA 1151, can function at its maximum in only in this case we are talking about support for the outdated RAM standard - DDR3, but LGA 1151 boasts support for the newest and fastest DDR4. Therefore, if we compare the latest Intel i5 vs AMD FX-9XXX, then even the flagship solutions of the latter will significantly lose in performance. Also within this platform there is support for an integrated graphics subsystem. But, unlike the sameLGA 1151The built-in graphics core in this case is part of the motherboard, and is not integrated into the semiconductor chip of the CPU.

The most recent AMD processor socket to date isFM2+. Its main niche is inexpensive multimedia stations, office or ultra-budget computers. main featureFM2+ -This is a very productive integrated subsystem, which in terms of performance can compete on equal terms with entry-level discrete video cards and is significantly ahead of Intel products of this class. But the limiting factor on the success of this socket is the weak processor part of this semiconductor solution. Therefore, the use of this connector in the context of even an entry-level is entirelyunjustified.

LGA 1151. Main characteristics

This computing platform currently occupies a dominant position in the desktop computer market, and it is it that provides a significant advantage in the comparison of Intel vs AMD on the side of the former. And both in quantitative and qualitative terms. As noted earlier, it boasts the following advantages over its direct competitors AM3+ and FM2+: a built-in DDR4 RAM controller, the mandatory presence of a graphics subsystem and cache memory, which includes three levels without fail. The positioning of chips within LGA 1151, as well as their most important parameters, are shown in Table 1. If we make a direct comparison between Intel Core i5 vs AMD FX-9 XXX series, then in the vast majority of tasks the advantage will be with the first solution. There is nothing special about this: the latest generation of Intel chips was introduced in the summer of 2015, and AMD in 2012. Therefore, it is quite difficult for the latter’s processor products to compete with newer and more productive Intel products.

Positioning of chips within LGA 1151. Their most important characteristics

Name of processors	In which PCs is it best to use such a chip?	Main settings
Celeron. CPU models G3920, G3900 and G3900TE.	Office system units with integrated graphics.	Advanced 14 nm process technology, excellent energy efficiency, three-level cache.
Pentium. Model series processors G44XX and G45XX.	Budget PCs that can handle most common tasks.	Compared to the most affordable Celeron chips Level 3 cache and clock speeds have been increased.
Core i3 models 61ХХ and 63ХХ.	Basic gaming PCs paired with powerful discrete graphics.	HT technology support, which allows you to get at the level With ofta 4 software processing streams. Increased L3 cache and clock speeds.
Core i5 models 64XX, 65XX and 66XX.	An average gaming system or graphics station combined with a powerful graphics card.	Full 4 cores, dynamic CPU frequency control, even larger cache size.
Core i7 models 67XX.	The most productive gaming PCs, video processing and encoding stations, entry-level servers.	4 cores and 8 software processing threads. Maximum cache size. Adjusting the processor frequency.
	System units for computer enthusiasts.	An unlocked multiplier allows you to significantly increase the speed of your computing system.

Processor socket LGA 2011-v3. Technical Specifications

Within this platform it is impossible to compare Intel vs AMD for the reason that this socket is unrivaled in performance today.LGA 2011-v3was originally developed as a server socket, but then a range of chipsXeon was supplemented Core i7,aimed at the segment of household PCs with unprecedented high performance.As was previously noted earlier, one cannot expect integrated graphics within such systems, and the RAM controller has 4 channels at once. Also, the undeniable advantages of this socket include the ability to install a CPU with 6 or even 12 cores, which also haveunlockedfactor. As a result, the productivity margin of such computing systems allows their owners will certainly not have to think about hardware requirements for the next 3-4 years. Intel vs AMD processors in context LGA 2011-v3comparison is unacceptable. There is simply a gap between them both in performance and in price. The latter for such PCs starts from several thousand dollars. But there is nothing special about this: such a PC is purchased several years in advance and has excessive performance.

Main parameters and features

It's not entirely correct to compare Intel Core vs AMD processor solutions FX.While the former are constantly updated and improved, the latter were released back in 2012 and since then there have been no changes within the AM3+ platform. As a result, the performance difference is simply huge.between these two platforms. AMD's flagship today can compete on equal terms only with the chips of the model rangeCore i3.All AM3+ processors have an unlocked multiplier, and, as a result, they can and should be overclocked. Under the most favorable circumstances, with such CPUs you can reach the 5 GHz bar. Also, this semiconductor crystal necessarily includes a 3-level cache. The RAM controller in this case is 2-channel, but, unlikeLGA 1151can't work with memoryDDR4 but only with DDR3.When compared with each other“ Core ” last generation, then the advantage of the latter in terms of performance will be very large.The approximate positioning of AM3+ chips in niches is given in the table below.

AM3+ chip positioning

Processor family name	Number of cores and modules	Purpose
FX-43XX	4/2	Budget and office PCs. Entry-level gaming systems.
FX-63XX	6/3	Mid-level gaming computers
FX-83XX	8/4	Graphics and workstations. Entry-level servers. The most productive gaming PCs within this platform.
FX-9XXX	8/4	Computers for enthusiasts.

Processor socket FM2+. The main platform for AMD hybrid chips

It is impossible to compare processor parts vs AMD A-series. These processors are aimed at solving completely different problems. The first of them allow you to create high-performance PCs, and the second - multimedia stations. But the situation changes dramatically when comparing graphics subsystems. Core i5, alas, cannot boast of a powerful integrated graphics subsystem, but the AMD hybrid chip is equipped by default with a video card, which even surpasses entry-level discrete accelerators in its capabilities. An important feature of this family of chips is that they are equipped only with a two-level cache memory.

Multimedia stations

Of course, within the niche of multimedia stations, it is possible to compare central processors such as Intel Core i5 vs AMD A10-ХХХХ, but this approach is not economically justified. Such computers place increased demands on the graphics subsystem, and are not so demanding on the processor part of the PC. It is precisely this combination of characteristics that the previously mentioned series of hybrid chips from AMD can boast of. Another important feature is their very low cost, which corresponds to 2-core CPU models from Intel. As a result, AMD occupies a dominant position in this highly specialized niche. The approximate configuration of such a PC is shown in the table below. The parameters of this computer will be quite sufficient for playing videos, listening to music, working in office applications, and even some toys will run on it at minimum settings.

Approximate configuration of a multimedia station

№ p/p	Name of components	Model	Cost, rubles
	CPU	A8-7850 3.6/3.9 GHz, 4 cores, 4 MB L2 cache.	5000 rubles
	Motherboard	MSI A78M-E35	3000 rubles
	RAM	TEAM 8 GB DDR3 1600 MHz	2000 rubles
	power unit	GameMax GM-500B	1200 rubles
	Frame	I-BOX FORCE 1807	900 rubles
	HDD	HDD 1 Tb 7200	2500 rubles
Total:			14600 rubles

Office computers

In this case, the comparison between AMD FX vs Intel will be on the side of the latter. It has very productive entry-level CPUs at very affordable prices. The Celeron chip will look most optimal within such a computing system. The approximate configuration of such a computer is given in the following table.

Office computer 2016

№p/p	PC component	Model	Approximate price, rubles
	CPU	Celeron G3900	2100 rubles
	Motherboard	ASUS H110M-R/C/SI	2400 rubles
	RAM	Silicon Power 4 GB DDR4 2133 MHz	1200 rubles
	power unit	Delux 400W FAN 120 mm	700 rubles
	Frame	Frime 165B	900 rubles
	HDD	WD WD1600AVVS, 160 GB	2200 rubles
Total:			9500 rubles

Entry-level gaming PCs

Theoretically, within the framework of an entry-level gaming PC, you can also compare, for example, AMD FX - 6300 vs Intel Core AI 3. But the difference in performance in this case will be simply fantastic. Moreover, the winner will be the second CPU, which has only 2 real modules for carrying out calculations instead of the one that has 6 paired blocks.

Therefore, in any case, the gaming system should be based on chips from Intel. They are more expensive, but their performance is significantly better. Well, for gaming systems, the number of displayed images per second comes first, and here the difference between AMD FX vs Intel i3 will be simply stunning. The approximate configuration of such a computer is shown in the table below.

Basic gaming system components

№ p/p	PC component	Model	Price, rubles
	CPU	i3-6100	6500 rubles
	Motherboard	ASUS H110M	2400 rubles
	RAM	2x 4 GB DDR4 2133 MHz	2400 rubles
	power unit	GameMax GM-500B	1200 rubles
	Frame	I-BOX FORCE 1805	900 rubles
	HDD	1Tb 7200	2 7 00 rubles
	Solid State Drive	128 GB SATA 3	2500 rubles
	Video card	Radeon RX460	7000 rubles
Total:			25,600 rubles

Average gaming systems

Comparing AMD FX-8350 vs Intel "Cor AI 5" even on a mid-level gaming PC in terms of the number of frames per second output, we get a significant difference. In some cases the difference will be 20-30 frames per second. This is unacceptable in dynamic games. Therefore, it is most correct to assemble a mid-level gaming system only on a full-fledged 4-core CPU from Intel. Moreover, it is best to look towards the i5-6600 chip. It is in combination with the GeForce 1060 that it will allow you to get excellent “Gameplay”. It should be noted that the video card must be equipped with 6GB of RAM. Also, installing processors with an unlocked multiplier in such a system is not entirely justified. They are aimed at the premium segment and to work in tandem with a more expensive and powerful video card. Otherwise, the approximate configuration is shown in the table below.

Mid-range gaming system

Component	Parameters, model	Price, rubles
CPU	i5-6600	15 000 rubles
Motherboard	ASUS In 150-M	6000 rubles
RAM	DDR4 3200MHz 16Gb	12000 rubles
power unit	1000W	7000 rubles
Frame	Midi-Tower	2000 rubles
HDD	2GB, 7200	6000 rubles
SSD drive	256GB	5500 rubles
Graphics accelerator	GeForce 1060, 6 GB	20 000 rubles
Total:		73,500 rubles

Uncompromising gaming PCs

If even when comparing Intel Core i5 vs AMD the undeniable advantage is already on the side of the first company, then in this case, in essence, the second company has no analogues. For the last 5 years, the premium CPU segment has been confidently occupied by the products of only one company - Intel, and even a comparison of AMD FX-9590 vs Intel LGA 2011-v3 does not give any chance to the products of the first company. As noted earlier, Core i7 processors for the LGA2011-v3 socket are aimed at this niche. They can include up to 10 computational units, have an increased amount of cache memory and an unlocked multiplier.

But the key difference in this case is the RAM controller, capable of operating in 4-channel mode. As a result, the RAM subsystem in this case is faster, and worthy competition for such computers does not yet exist.

PC for the computer enthusiast

Component	Characteristics	Price, rubles
CPU	Core i7-6950 X	100,000 rubles
Video card	8 GB	50,000 rubles
RAM	32 GB, DDR4	25 000 rubles
Motherboard	X99	45,000 rubles
power unit	1000 W	16,000 rubles
Frame	ATX	2000 rubles
HDD	2Gb, 7200	8,000 rubles
SSD drive	512 GB	10,000 rubles
Total:		256,000 rubles

Graphic stations

Even within this specialized niche, a comparison between AMD FX vs Intel Core i5 indicates that the first company's products are outdated and inferior in all respects. The base chip for such a PC is i5-6400.

The approximate configuration of such a system is given in the following table.

Graphics station equipment

№ p/p	Component	Model	Cost in rubles
	CPU	i5-6400	11 000 rubles
	Motherboard	ASUS Z-170DE	5400 rubles
	RAM	DDR4 16Gb	10,000 rubles
	power unit	Aerocool VX-800	5400 rubles
	Frame	Frime 165B	2000 rubles
	HDD	1Tb SATA 3, 7200, 64 Mb cache	40 00 rubles
	Solid State Drive	256 GB SATA 3	50 00 rubles
	Video card	Radeon Pro2DUO	120,000 rubles
Total:			162,800 rubles

What's next?

The next few months will be very busy in the processor market. First, in January, Intel will update its lineup of chips and present the 7th generation of its architecture, codenamed Core. No fundamental changes are expected in this case. We will work on bugs, slightly improve performance and add some new technologies. Then, towards the end of the first quarter, AMD will finally release its new socket, which it will call AM4. In this case, the changes will already be revolutionary in nature. The chips will be produced using a new technical process, have an improved architecture and will feature new technologies. It is these Zen processors that will, in theory, restore parity in the CPU market. Only after this will it be advisable to revise the previously given computer configurations.

Results

Let us summarize the comparison of Intel vs AMD processor products carried out within the framework of this material. The only niche where the second company’s position is still strong is multimedia systems and PCs for budget and office use. Moreover, in the second case, Intel products look even more preferable. Another advantage that AMD can boast of is the lower cost of its products. But is it worth saving the same $100 and getting an outdated system?even by today's standards. This is already obvious: a PC is bought for 3-5 years, so in all other cases, when buying a new computer system, it is more correct to focus on comparisonspecifically for the products of the second company.

Almost every year a new generation of Intel Xeon E5 central processors enters the market. Each generation alternates between socket and process technology. There are more and more nuclei, and heat generation is gradually decreasing. But a natural question arises: “What does the new architecture give to the end user?”

To do this, I decided to test the performance of similar processors of different generations. I decided to compare models from the mass segment: 8-core processors 2660, 2670, 2640V2, 2650V2, 2630V3 and 2620V4. Testing with such a generational spread is not entirely fair, because Between V2 and V3 there is a different chipset, a new generation of memory with a higher frequency, and most importantly, there are no direct peers in frequency among the models of all 4 generations. But, in any case, this study will help to understand to what extent the performance of new processors has increased in real applications and synthetic tests.

The selected line of processors has many similar parameters: the same number of cores and threads, 20 MB SmartCache, 8 GT/s QPI (except 2640V2) and the number of PCI-E lanes equal to 40.

To assess the feasibility of testing all processors, I turned to the results of the PassMark tests.

Below is a summary graph of the results:

Since the frequency is significantly different, it is not entirely correct to compare the results. But despite this, conclusions immediately arise:

1. 2660 is equivalent in performance to 2620V4
2. 2670 is superior in performance to 2620V4 (obviously due to frequency)
3. 2640V2 sags, and 2650V2 beats everyone (also due to frequency)

I divided the result by frequency and got a certain performance value at 1 GHz:

Here the results are more interesting and clear:

1. 2660 and 2670 - an unexpected turnaround for me within one generation, 2670 is justified only by the fact that its overall performance is very high
2. 2640V2 and 2650V2 - a very strange low result, which is worse than the 2660
3. 2630V3 and 2620V4 - the only logical growth (apparently due to the new architecture...)

After analyzing the result, I decided to weed out some of the uninteresting models that are of no value for further testing:

1. 2640V2 and 2650V2 - an intermediate generation, and not very successful, in my opinion - I’m removing them from the candidates
2. 2630V3 is an excellent result, but it costs unreasonably more than 2620V4, given the similar performance and, moreover, this is the outgoing generation of processors
3. 2620V4 - reasonable price (compared to 2630V3), high performance and, most importantly, this is the only model of the latest generation 8-core processor with Hyper-threading on our list, so we definitely leave it for further tests
4. 2660 and 2670 - an excellent result in comparison with 2620V4. In my opinion, it is the comparison of the first and last (at the moment) generations in the Intel Xeon E5 line that is of particular interest. In addition, we still have sufficient stocks of first-generation processors in our warehouse, so this comparison is very relevant for us.

The cost of servers based on 2660 and 2620V4 processors can differ by almost 2 times, not in favor of the latter, so by comparing their performance and choosing a server on V1 processors, you can significantly reduce the budget for purchasing a new server. But I will tell you about this proposal after the test results.

For testing, 3 stands were assembled:

1. 2 x Xeon E5-2660, 8 x 8Gb DDR3 ECC REG 1333, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb
2. 2 x Xeon E5-2670, 8 x 8Gb DDR3 ECC REG 1333, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb
3. 2 x Xeon E5-2620V4, 8 x 8Gb DDR4 ECC REG 2133, SSD Intel Enterprise 150Gb

PassMark PerformanceTest 9.0

When selecting processors for testing, I already used the results of synthetic tests, but now it’s interesting to compare these models in more detail. I made the comparison in groups: 1st generation versus 4th.

A more detailed testing report allows us to draw some conclusions:

1. Mathematics, incl. and floating point, mainly depends on frequency. The difference of 100 MHz allowed the 2660 to outpace the 2620V4 in computational operations, encryption and compression (and this despite the significant difference in memory frequency)
2. Physics and calculations using extended instructions are performed better on the new architecture, despite the low frequency
3. And, of course, the test using memory was in favor of V4 processors, since in this case different generations of memory were competing - DDR4 and DDR3.

It was synthetic. Let's see what specialized benchmarks and real applications show.

Archiver 7ZIP

Here the results have something in common with the previous test - a direct link to the processor frequency. It doesn’t matter that slower memory is installed - V1 processors confidently take the lead in frequency.

CINEBENCH R15

CINEBENCH is a benchmark for evaluating computer performance for working with professional animation software MAXON Cinema 4D.

The Xeon E5-2670 pulled up the frequency and beat the 2620V4. But the E5-2660, which has a not so visible advantage in frequency, lost to the 4th generation processor. Hence the conclusion - this software uses useful additions of the new architecture (although perhaps it’s all a matter of memory...), but not so much that this is a decisive factor.

3DS MAX + V-Ray

To evaluate processor performance when rendering in a real application, I took a combination: 3ds Max 2016 + V-ray 3.4 + a real scene with several light sources, specular and transparent materials, and an environment map.

The results were similar to CINEBENCH: the Xeon E5-2670 showed the lowest rendering time, and the 2660 could not beat the 2620V4.

1C: SQL/File

At the end of the testing, I attach the results of the gilev tests for 1C.

When testing a database with file access, the E5-2620V4 processor confidently leads. The table shows the average values ​​of 20 runs of the same test. The difference between the results of each stand in the case of a file database was no more than 2%.

A single-threaded SQL database test showed very strange results. The difference turned out to be insignificant, given the different frequencies of the 2660 and 2670, and the different frequencies of DDR3 and DDR4. There was an attempt to optimize the SQL settings, but the results turned out to be worse than they were, so I decided to test all the stands on the basic settings.

The results of the multi-threaded SQL test turned out to be even more strange and contradictory. The maximum speed of 1 thread in MB/s was equivalent to the performance index in the previous single-threaded test.

The next parameter was the maximum speed (of all streams) - the result was almost identical for all stands. Since the results of different runs fluctuated greatly (+-5%) - sometimes they were at different stands with a significant gap in both directions. The same average multi-threaded SQL test results lead me to 3 thoughts:

1. This situation is caused by an unoptimized SQL configuration
2. The SSD became a system bottleneck and did not allow the processors to overclock
3. There is almost no difference between the frequency of memory and processors for these tasks (which is extremely unlikely)

The result for the “Recommended number of users” parameter also turned out to be inexplicable. The average result of 2660 turned out to be the highest - and this despite the low results of all tests.
I will also be glad to see your comments on this issue.

conclusions

The results of several diverse computing tests showed that the processor frequency in most cases turned out to be more important than the generation, architecture, and even memory frequency. Of course, there is modern software that uses all the improvements of the new architecture. For example, video transcoding is sometimes performed incl. using AVX2.0 instructions, but this is specialized software - and most server applications are still tied to the number and frequency of cores.

Of course, I’m not saying that there is no difference at all between processors, I just want to point out that for certain applications there is no point in a “planned” transition to a new generation.

If you disagree with me or have suggestions for testing, the stands have not yet been dismantled, and I will be happy to test your tasks.

Economic benefit

As I already wrote at the beginning of the article, we offer a line of servers based on first-generation Xeon E5 processors, which are significantly cheaper in cost than servers based on the E5-2620V4.
These are the same new servers (not to be confused with used ones) with a 3-year warranty.

Below is an approximate calculation.

Now smartphones can process a mountain of information if desired. Their processor power is enough to solve absolutely any problem. At the same time, modern chipsets consume a minimal amount of electricity, for which we should thank the improved technical process. Our rating of smartphone processors will tell you about the most powerful models. Devices based on them can be blamed for anything, but certainly not for lack of power!

Good to know!

Now the most famous companies in the mobile processor market are the following:

• Qualcomm- produces chipsets from the Snapdragon series;
• Samsung- creates Exynos chips;
• MediaTek- flagship processors are distributed under the Helio brand;
• Huawei- chipsets under the HiSilicon sub-brand are mainly built into their own smartphones.

At the same time, it is impossible to say exactly which chips are more powerful and which are weaker. Of course, there are all kinds of tests and benchmarks. But their result can be called conditional, hypothetical. In practice, each processor operates in its own mode, rarely raising clock speeds to maximum. And yet, our rating can be considered correct - the mobile processors left out of it suffer from certain shortcomings, and devices based on them cannot be called ideal.

Our top may not include recently announced models. We decided to talk only about those products whose smartphones are already on store shelves.

Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890

• Year of issue: 2016
• Technical process: 14 nm
• Architecture: Samsung Exynos M1 + ARM Cortex-A53 (ARMv8-A)
• Video accelerator: Mali-T880, 12 cores, 650 MHz

Geekbench result: 5940 points

If not the best processor for a smartphone, then at least one of those worthy of this title. It’s not for nothing that all variations of the South Korean Galaxy S7 are equipped with it. Is it possible to blame this flagship for lack of power? The chipset can easily handle 4K video at 60 fps. It consists of eight cores. The maximum frequency is 2290 MHz. But it rarely comes to raising it to such a level, since lower frequencies are quite enough to solve most problems.

Unfortunately, the processor also has certain problems. It just so happens that South Korean chipsets are not equipped with the best video accelerator (GPU). Here too, the Mali-T880, despite its 12 cores, performs strictly to the “good” rating, but nothing more. This is proven by tests in GFXBench, where in terms of graphics, the Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 is ahead of some other chipsets reviewed today.

Advantages

• Supports video in 2160p resolution at 60 frames/s;
• Not very hot;
• Low energy consumption;
• High scores in benchmarks.

Flaws

• The memory test does not show the best results;
• The graphics accelerator could perform better.

Samsung Galaxy S7, Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge, Samsung Galaxy Golden 4

Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996

• Year of issue: 2015
• Technical process: 14 nm FinFET
• Architecture: Qualcomm Kryo
• Video accelerator: Adreno 530, 624 MHz

Geekbench result: 4890 points

Qualcomm does not have its own production facilities. However, it has many patents at its disposal. And with them, developing a processor close to ideal is not difficult, after which all that remains is to place an order for production from other companies. Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 pleases with both computing power and graphics processing capabilities. Many flagships released in 2016 were equipped with this chipset. And none of their customers complained about the graphics in mobile games!

The chip consists of only four cores. However, this did not stop it from scoring record scores in benchmarks - not least thanks to the graphics accelerator. The maximum frequency of this processor is 2150 MHz. At the hardware level, the chipset supports HDMI 2.0, USB 3.0, and Bluetooth 4.1. In short, the processor could easily cope even with the tasks assigned to a laptop! It also features support for a camera with a resolution of up to 28 megapixels - which is why Sony chose this processor, whose flagship smartphones have just such a sensor.

Advantages

• Very high resolution camera support;
• Capable of processing Full HD video at up to 240 frames/s;
• Supports 10-bit 4K video;
• Windows devices use DirectX 11.2;
• Very high clock speed;
• Not very high energy consumption;
• High scores in benchmarks;
• The memory test leads to high results;
• Excellent performance in games.

Flaws

• Sometimes it gets quite hot.

The most popular smartphones: Motorola Moto Z Force, Elite X3, ASUS ZenFone 3, HTC 10, Samsung Galaxy S7, Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge, Sony Xperia X Performance, Sony Xperia XR, Xiaomi Mi5 Pro, ZTE Nubia Z11

HiSilicon Kirin 95

• Year of manufacture: 2016
• Technical process: 16 nm
• Architecture:
• Video accelerator: Mali-T880, 4 cores

Geekbench result: 6000 points

This chipset is manufactured using a 16-nanometer process technology, which indicates its decent energy efficiency. The maximum frequency here is increased to 2.5 GHz. The creators had to take this step because of the Mali-T880 graphics accelerator, which does not cope with its task in the best way.

The Chinese chipset consists of eight cores, four of which can be called auxiliary. Paired with a GPU, it is capable of playing 4K video at 60 fps. But the processor is only capable of playing back - independently creating video recordings - in 1080p resolution. And this despite the fact that the chip even supports dual cameras, the total resolution of which is 42 megapixels. It is also able to recognize Bluetooth 4.2 and USB 3.0 modules.

Advantages

• Supports many modern wireless technologies;
• Almost record clock speed;
• There are no big problems with overheating;
• Can decode 4K video at 60fps;
• Supports dual high definition cameras.

Flaws

• The graphics accelerator shows poor results.

The most popular smartphones: Huawei P9, Huawei P9 Plus, Huawei Honor V8, Huawei Honor Note 8.

HiSilicon Kirin 950

• Year of issue: 2015
• Technical process: 16 nm
• Architecture: 4x ARM Cortex-A72 + 4x ARM Cortex-A53
• Video accelerator: Mali-T880, 4 cores, 900 MHz

Geekbench result: 5950 points

In 2015-2016, this processor was used by many Huawei smartphones. The chipset consists of eight cores, the power of four of them can reach 2300 MHz. It would seem that the result is quite good. But not everything is so simple. The weak point of the chip is the graphics accelerator. The first version of Mali-T880 is used here. It copes well with video decoding - in theory, you can even run 4K video at 60 frames/s. But in games this GPU performs disgustingly, especially by flagship standards.

However, you can’t find fault with the computing power of this chipset, which is why it made it into our top processors. The product supports Bluetooth 4.2 and USB 3.0 standards, although the Chinese giant has not really produced smartphones with such high-speed interfaces, preferring to save money. Also, in theory, the processor copes with the data stream from a dual camera with a total resolution of 42 megapixels.

Advantages

• Supports USB 3.0 and Bluetooth 4.2;
• High computing power;
• Support for modern memory formats;
• Not very expensive to produce;
• Decodes high definition video;
• Capable of handling a dual 42-megapixel camera.

Flaws

• The graphics accelerator could be much better;
• Cannot provide the camera with 4K video recording.

The most popular smartphones: Huawei Honor 8, Huawei Honor Note 8, Huawei Mate 8, Huawei Honor V8.

Apple A9X APL1021

• Year of issue: 2015
• Technical process: 16 nm
• Architecture: Apple Twister 64-bit ARMv8-compatible
• Video accelerator: PowerVR Series 7X, 12 cores

Geekbench result : 5400 points

Why do game developers primarily focus on Apple smartphones and tablets? Is it really only their owners who can afford to buy a toy? No, everything is much simpler. This is the technique that games work best on. The Apple A9X APL1021 processor is equipped with an almost ideal graphics accelerator, which can solve absolutely any problem! If Apple wanted, it could even implement a 4K video recording feature at 60 frames per second!

As for computing power, everything is fine here, although the processor still does not score record scores in benchmarks. It would seem that only two cores are used here. But for solving everyday problems this is quite enough. Not least because of the better optimized operating system.

Advantages

• High power of two cores;
• Excellent 12-core graphics accelerator;
• Full support for 4K video at 60 fps;
• Support for many modern technologies;
• Recognizes modern memory formats.

Flaws

Apple iPad Pro

MediaTek MT6797 Helio X25

• Year of issue: 2016
• Technical process: 20 nm
• Architecture: 2x ARM Cortex-A72 + 4x ARM Coptex-A53 + 4x ARM Coptex-A53
• Video accelerator: Mali-T880MP4, 4 cores, 850 MHz

Geekbench result: 4920 points

A processor with a fairly complex structure. It consists of ten nuclei belonging to two varieties. The two cores are the most powerful - they belong to the Cortex-A72 type, and their clock speed can reach 2500 MHz. The remaining computing cores belong to the Cortex-A53 type. Moreover, half of them are overclocked to a frequency of 2000 MHz, while the rest are limited to 1550 MHz.

All this allows the processor to score a lot of points in benchmarks. And the result would have been even higher if not for the graphics accelerator. This element here is seriously limited in its capabilities. Yes, it supports full work with 4K video, including its creation, but only at 30 fps. And in games the GPU copes with its task even worse. As for other characteristics, we should highlight support for 32-megapixel cameras and the Bluetooth 4.1 standard. The maximum display resolution of a smartphone with such a chipset can reach 2560 x 1600 pixels.

Advantages

• Support for 32 MP camera;
• Very high computing power;
• Relatively low power consumption;
• Although limited, there is support for 4K video;
• Low cost chipset.

Flaws

• The GPU performs poorly in games;
• No Bluetooth 4.2 support.

The most popular smartphones: Meizu Pro 6, Oukitel K6000 Premium, Xiaomi Redmi Pro, Zopo Speed ​​8, Vernee Apollo.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 625 MSM8953

• Year of issue: 2016
• Technical process: 14 nm
• Architecture: ARM Cortex-A53 (ARMv8)
• Video accelerator: Adreno 506

Geekbench result: 4900 points

One of Qualcomm's most popular creations. It is endowed with a huge number of smartphones from the mid-budget and even top segments. The manufacturer did not bother with the architecture, giving the chipset eight identical cores. The maximum clock frequency is 2000 MHz, which is quite enough for the average user.

The graphics accelerator here is optimized for processing video content. Theoretically, a smartphone built on the basis of this processor is capable of playing and recording 4K video at 60 frames per second. But in games some problems begin. Although their presence is surprising, because the GPU even has support for DirectX 12, which is activated on devices with Windows on board. The chipset also supports a dual camera, the total resolution of which does not exceed 24 megapixels. The only thing missing here is USB 3.0 support. However, smartphone creators do not like to integrate such high-speed connectors into their creations.

Advantages

• Dual camera supported;
• Fast charging technology is well implemented;
• High power of all eight cores;
• Full support for 4K video content at 60 fps;
• Relatively low cost.

Flaws

• Camera resolution cannot exceed 24 megapixels;
• No Bluetooth 4.2 support;
• Display resolution cannot exceed 1920 x 1200 pixels;
• In games, the chipset does not perform well.

The most popular smartphones: Huawei G9 Plus, ASUS ZenFone 3, Fujitsu Easy, Huawei Maimang 5, Lenovo Vibe P2, Motorola Moto Z Play, Samsung Galaxy C7.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 620 APQ8076

• Year of issue: 2016
• Technical process: 28 nm
• Architecture: 4x ARM Cortex-A72 + 4x ARM Cortex-A53
• Video accelerator: Adreno 510

Geekbench result: 4886 points

This chipset is also known as the Snapdragon 652. It is one of the last processors that is still produced on the 28nm process. The creators are not at all embarrassed by the relatively large size of the chip, since it is built mainly into tablets.

The processor consists of eight computing cores. The clock frequency of four of them can reach 1800 MHz. This is quite enough for the tablet to solve basic tasks without any hesitation. The chipset also includes the Adreno 510 graphics accelerator. There are no special complaints about it, because no one will expect excellent graphics performance from the tablet. It should be noted that theoretically the chip supports video processing in 2160p resolution at 30 frames/s. It also boasts support for Bluetooth 4.1 and proprietary Quick Charge 3.0 fast charging technology.

Advantages

• Supports devices with high screen resolutions;
• Great computing power;
• Albeit limited, but still support for 4K video;
• Built-in fast charging technology.

Flaws

• No Bluetooth 4.2 support;
• Still not the best graphics accelerator.

Most popular devices: Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 Plus 8.0, Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 Plus 9.7.

MediaTek MT6797M Helio X20

• Year of issue: 2016
• Technical process: 20 nm
• Architecture: 2x ARM Cortex-A72 + 4x ARM Cortex-A53 + 4x ARM Cortex-A53
• Video accelerator: Mali-T880MP4, 4 cores, 780 MHz

Geekbench result: 5130 points

Many mobile processors have four or even eight cores. In the case of the MediaTek MT6797M Helio X20, their number has been increased to ten. As a result, the performance of the chipset is very high. Especially in applications that do not require serious graphics processing. It should be noted that only two computing cores are particularly powerful here - their clock frequency reaches 2300 MHz. The remaining nuclei are divided into two groups. One can please you with a frequency of 1850 MHz, while the other has this parameter fixed at 1400 MHz. But the result in any case is very good, which is confirmed by synthetic tests, and by the smartphones themselves - the interface on them does not slow down at all thanks to the chipset.

As for the graphics accelerator, everything is much worse here. Theoretically, it copes with viewing and recording 4K video at 30 frames per second. But in games you immediately feel a lack of power. Modern games will run on a smartphone with such a processor, but with simplified graphics. Especially if the device has a screen with Full HD resolution or higher. It should also be noted that the processor supports almost any mobile camera - as long as the module resolution does not exceed 32 megapixels.

Technical process: 28 nm

Architecture: ARM Cortex-A72 + ARM Cortex-A53 (ARMv8)

Video accelerator: Adreno 510

Geekbench result: 4610 points

There are two versions of the Qualcomm Snapdragon 620 processor, also known as the Snapdragon 652. The first is the MSM8976, which was released in 2015. A year later, a slightly more improved version was released - APQ8076, which was received by some Samsung tablets. The products are practically no different from each other. They have eight cores, half of which are capable of increasing the frequency to 1800 MHz. Both processors are equipped with a far from ideal Adreno 510 graphics accelerator.

Qualcomm's creation is capable of supporting smartphones whose display has a resolution of no higher than 2560 x 1600 pixels. As for the camera, it is possible to process data coming from a dual module, the total resolution of which does not exceed 21 megapixels. Everything is fine with the module and its capabilities for processing data coming from dual-channel LPDDR3 memory.

Advantages

• High performance;
• View 4K video at 30 fps;
• Theoretical possibility of recording video in 1080p and 120 frames/s;
• Not very high cost;
• Dual camera support;
• Screen resolution can reach 2560 x 1600 pixels.

Flaws

• Bluetooth 4.2 is not supported;
• The maximum camera resolution cannot be very high.

The most popular smartphones: Vivo X6S A, Vivo X7, Vivo X7 Plus, LeEco Le2, G5 SE, Oppo R9 Plus, Samsung Galaxy A9 Pro (2016), ZTE Nubia Z11 Max, Xiaomi Mi Max

This material will provide The leading manufacturer of these products is Intel. This company has a dominant positionIn this high-tech market, its semiconductor solutions can be found in almost all its segments.

Why Intel?

As noted earlier, Intel silicon chips form the basis of most electronic devices. Starting with smartphones and tablets, continuing with netbooks, ultrabooks and laptops and ending with high-performance personal computers - most of this technology is based on semiconductor products from this leading manufacturer. Therefore, the performance rating of Intel processors as accurately as possible for eachsegments of this large marketwill allow us to determine the most optimaltechnical specifications.Intel's competitors are focusing on them and, due to this, are trying to catch up with the leading manufacturer of semiconductor products.

Mobile gadgets segment

The performance rating of smartphone processors based on Intel chips includes the latest devices from the ATOM series. This line includes X3, X5 and X7. The least productive in this case are the first semiconductor solutions, and this model range includes C3405 and C3445.

Their technical parameters are identical: 4 computing modules, frequency range 1.2-1.4 GHz, 1 MB cache memory and 28 nm production technology. The key difference between these two semiconductor products is that the first is designed for use in tablets and does not have a mobile communications module, while the second is designed for the smartphone market and is equipped with a cellular transceiver. The X5 line also includes two CPU models: Z8300 and Z8500. They also have 4 code processing units, but these crystals are produced according to 14 nm standards, equipped with a large cache capacity of 2 MB and clock frequencies for the first of them are in the range of 1.44-1.84 GHz, and for the second - 1.44 -2.24 GHz.

The flagship of the X7 line, in this case, is one - Z8700. Its characteristics are almost identical to the X5. The only difference is the clock speeds - 1.6-2.4 GHz. The main technical specifications of this family of processors are given in the table below.

Characteristics of the family of processors for smartphones and tablets

Chip family	CPU model	Frequencies, GHz	Cash, MB	Number of cores, pieces	Technology, nm
X3	S3405	1.2-1.4 GHz
	S3445
X5	Z8300	1,44-1,84
	Z8500	1,44-2,24
X7	Z8700	1,6-2,4

Laptop niche

WITH The segment of office-class solutions in this case is occupied by line CPUsCeleron.Maximum autonomy and minimum speed, which is only enough foroffice applications, web surfing and other undemanding tasks, in this case come to the fore. This line includes two CPU models -N3350 And N3450.The key difference between them is the number of computational units. The first chip has only 2 of them, and the second has 4. Accordingly, in the second case the performance will be slightly better.



Entry-level laptops are based on the line's CPUsPentiumwhich currently consists of 1 chip -N4200.Improved technical specifications of this processor allow it to demonstrate higher performance. As a result, this chip can even run some games with minimal hardware specifications.

Mid-range mobile computing systems are based on line CPUsCore i3.As in the previous case, only one model belongs to this family of processor devices - 7100U.Improved technical parameters compared to previous chips and the presence of NT technology can significantly increase productivity, in this case it is possible to launch almost all toys. The only exceptions in this case are those that put forward the most stringent requirements for the microprocessor architecture.

N the most powerful laptops are based on chipsi5 And i7.Excellent technical parameters and phenomenal performance allow owners of such computers to solve any problem. In this case, even the latest and most demanding toys will work without any problems.These CPU families are currently represented by the following models: 7200U And 7Y54 For i5 And 7500U And 7Y75 For i7respectively.



Desktops

Processor performance rating for desktop computing systems, much of it duplicates what was previously given for laptops. Only if in the previous case R We were talking about the 7th generation of chips, but in this case the 6th comes to the fore. The update of the CPU model range in this case is planned for January 2017. As a result, the current rating is as follows:

• The level of office solutions is occupied by solutionsCeleron ( models G3900 And G3920).There are no fundamental differences between them. Only in the latter case is it slightly increased from 2.8 GHz to 2.9 GHz. Otherwise, these are excellent chips for creating an office computing system.

  The entry level in this case is also occupied by the line’s CPUsPentium ( models G4400, G4500 And G4520).Their performance level is almost identical. These chips are great for basic gaming systems. But in this case the owneryou will have to refuse to run the most demanding games, which due to insufficient hardware specifications will not work on such a PC.

  The middle level, as in the case of laptops, is filled with CPUCore i3. Their models are 6100, 6300 and 6320. Their performance is more than enough for comfortable gameplay in any modern game. The main factor that increases productivity is the presence of NT technology and an increase in program code processing threads from 2 to 4.

  Processor performance rating from Intel for desktops will not be complete if you lose sight of the CPU seriesi5 And i7. ABOUTThey provide phenomenal performance and allow you to solve all currently possible problems.Models 6400, 6500 and 6600 - for the linei5, 6700 - for ruler i7.



Summary

Within the framework of this material, the currently relevantfrom the leading manufacturer of semiconductor products - Intel. With its help, you can determine the ownership of the device and find out a list of tasks that can be solved with its help.

Considering the best processors of 2017, it is worth noting that the performance of each is sufficient to run gaming applications.

Even budget versions, together with suitable memory and a video card, can easily handle running a modern game with good resolution.

And you can choose the model that suits you based on several parameters - cache memory, frequency, number of cores and threads, power consumption and, of course, price.

Features of choice

The processor frequency, which is an important parameter of this device, is at the level of 3–4 GHz in modern models. And although some of them can increase this characteristic when overclocking or turning on turbo mode, this does not matter much.

Much more important for running games and applications are the characteristics of the video card working together with the central processor.

Another important parameter is energy consumption during operation, which determines the power of the computer power supply and cooling cooler. This figure is significantly lower for Intel brand models and higher for AMD processors. However, the greater the performance of the device, the smaller the difference in power consumption between the top versions - regardless of the manufacturer, they have a power of about 90 W.

The number of cores and threads determines the speed of data processing. The higher these numbers, the higher the likelihood of running not only a modern and resource-demanding game on your computer, but also any applications over the next few years. Most modern processors have from 4 to 8 cores. And dual-core ones are considered almost obsolete - especially if you use them for games.

Ryzen 7 1800X - the best gaming processor

The Ryzen 7 series of processors, released in 2017, includes a number of top models, the oldest of which is the 1800X. The performance of each thread and core is inferior to the capabilities of the similar Intel Core i7 model, but the device benefits due to their number. The eight-core processor processes a large amount of information and can be overclocked from 3.6 to 4 GHz.

Additional advantages of purchasing a processor include Neural Net Prediction technology, which is actually built-in artificial intelligence to speed up data processing. And among the disadvantages we can note the lack of “boxed versions”, that is, models immediately equipped with a powerful cooler. The cooling system for Ryzen 7 will have to be purchased separately.

Model characteristics:

• socket: AM4;
• Frequency (normal/turbo): 3.6/4.0 GHz;
• L3 cache: 16 MB;
• cores/threads: 8/16;
• power: 95 W;
• price: from 28,000 rub.

Rice. 1. Ryzen 7 1800X.

Core i7-7700K - maximum performance from Intel

The Intel processor lineup also has its leader - the i7-7700K, characterized by high performance and clock speed. At the same time, the device consumes a relatively large amount of electricity - almost as much as a top-end AMD. And the processor frequency can vary within 4.2–4.7 GHz - enough to support any, even the most demanding games of 2016, 2017 and, most likely, 2018.

Although, in order for the device to run resource-intensive applications, it should be used together with a suitable memory and video card (from 8 GB and from 4 GB, respectively). The capabilities of the built-in graphics processor will not be enough for the game, but it will be enough to play video in the best resolution to date.

Main parameters:

• energy consumption: 91 W;
• socket: 1151;
• frequency: 4.2 GHz (4.5 GHz in turbo mode);
• L3 cache: 8 MB;
• number of cores/processes: 4/4;
• average price: 25,000 rub.

Rice. 2. i7-7700K.

Core i5-7500 - fast gaming processor

If prices above 20 thousand rubles seem too high to the user, he can buy an Intel processor from the previous series - Core i5-7500.

The price will be half that of i7 models, and the performance and size of the third-level cache memory are almost as good as the “older” versions. If you have a good video card and 8–16 GB of RAM, you can run any game released today using this processor.

The advantages of the model include the built-in graphics core Intel HD Graphics 630, which supports videos with 4K resolution. And support for DirectX 12 technology provides even better interaction with games, allowing the processor to be called both fast and gaming-ready.

Model characteristics:

• power, W: 65;
• frequency, GHz: 3.4–3.8;
• socket: 1151;
• threads and cores: 4/4;
• L3 cache, MB: 6;
• prices, rub.: from 11,600 rub.

Rice. 3. Intel Core i5-7500.

Ryzen 5 1600X - Mid-range AMD

A more economical option, but practically not inferior in terms of capabilities to the top model, is also available in the Ryzen 5 line from AMD. The 1600X processor is one of the five best offers from the manufacturer. However, it costs almost 40% less.

The operating frequency and cache of the model are fully consistent with the Rysen 7 series, and the only important difference is the smaller number of cores. However, if you do not use the processor at full capacity, the difference will be almost unnoticeable. Moreover, the speed of the device increases thanks to the same built-in “artificial intelligence”.

Technical specifications:

• socket version: AM4;
• frequency: 3.6 (4.0 in turbo mode);
• L3 cache: 16 MB;
• cores/threads: 6/12;
• energy consumption: 95 W;
• cost: from 16,000 rub.

Rice. 4. Ryzen 5 1600X.

Intel Core i3-7100 is a good gaming processor

Users who prefer to build their computer based on Intel processors and not pay more than $1000 for a system unit should pay attention to the Core i3-7100 model.

A device with two cores but four threads will be able to run even those games whose minimum requirements include Core i5 or i7. To do this, the processor should be installed on a PC with sufficient RAM and graphics memory. Although this model already has built-in support for DirectX 12 and integrated video, which allow it to work even without a discrete video card.

Main characteristics:

• frequency and socket: 3.9 GHz, 1151;
• L3 cache: 3 MB;
• number of threads/cores: 4/2;
• CPU power consumption: 51 W;
• cost: 6300–9700 rub.

Rice. 5. Intel Core i3-7100.

AMD FX-6300 - profitable and fast

Manufacturer AMD, whose products have always been less expensive than Intel models, allows you to choose an excellent alternative to a budget gaming processor.

For example, the FX-6300, which may come with an inexpensive motherboard and 8 GB of RAM.

This set will work with most modern games and applications. Moreover, using the FX-6300 processor, it is quite possible to watch two different films on two monitors, record streams and process video.

Model features:

• socket: AM3+;
• power consumption parameters: 95 W;
• processor frequency: 3.5 GHz;
• cache memory level 3: 8 MB;
• cores and threads: 6/6;
• prices online: from 4400 rub.

Rice. 6. AMD FX-6300.

Pentium G4560 - cheap gaming processor

Another budget Intel model is the Pentium G4560, which you can buy when building an inexpensive gaming PC.

If you use this processor for assembly, the cost of the kit (without monitor) will not exceed $500. And the resources of the resulting computer will be enough either to run modern games at minimum settings, or for older gaming applications.

The best match for such a processor is an RX 460 or GTX 7xx video card that matches its price and performance (for example, Nvidia 750 Ti).

Processor Features:

• slot: Socket 1151;
• frequency: 3.5 GHz;
• power consumption: 54 W;
• cache memory level 3: 3 MB;
• cores/threads: 2/4;
• prices: from 3500 rub.

Rice. 7. Pentium G4560.

Athlon X4 860K - budget processor from AMD

If processor power consumption is not important to the user, it is advisable to pay attention to the X4 860K model, which differs in its optimal performance-to-price ratio.

For only 2800–3000 rubles, the user gets a device without a built-in graphics processor, but with a silent cooler and four cores. Moreover, another advantage of the processor is its compatibility with inexpensive motherboards for the FM2+ socket, although they do not support either modern memory or new video cards.

Characteristics:

• CPU socket: FM2+;
• frequency: 3.7 GHz;
• number of cores and threads: 4/4;
• L3 cache: no;
• power: 95 W;
• price: from 2800 rubles.

Rice. 8. Athlon X4 860K.

AMD A10-7890K – great capabilities and savings on video

For users who prefer to use integrated graphics, the AMD A10-7890K processor is a good option. Among its advantages is the ability to run many modern gaming applications even without using a powerful video card.

The characteristics of the device are approximately comparable to RX460 GPUs, which means they are suitable for most eSports games like DOTA2 and CS:GO with high image quality.

Subsequently, you can purchase a discrete video card for the A10-7890K, expanding the possibilities of using your computer. This is often what gamers do, buying parts for a budget gaming PC in stages - according to their financial capabilities.

Part parameters:

• Socket: FM2+;
• processor frequency: 4.1 GHz;
• cores/threads: 4/4;
• power consumption: 95 W;
• average price: 8000 rub.

Rice. 9. A10-7890K.

A10-7860K - the most profitable gaming processor

If you want to buy a processor with good capabilities and an inexpensive processor with integrated graphics, you can pay attention to the A10-7860K - the “junior” model of the A10-7890K.

The operating speed and most characteristics of the devices differ little from each other. But by choosing a more affordable option, the cost of assembling a computer is reduced by another $30–35, practically without noticing a decrease in performance.

Processor parameters:

• number of cores/threads: 4/4;
• socket: FM2+;
• frequency: 3.6 GHz;
• power: 65 W;
• cost online: 6000 rub.

Rice. 10. A10-7860K.

conclusions

Based on the results of a review of the best-in-class modern processors, we can draw conclusions about a good range of options on the modern market.

Depending on financial capabilities and computer requirements, any user can find a suitable chipset.

For example, Intel i7 and Ryzen 7 for powerful games and graphics work. Or Athlon X4 860K and Pentium G4560 for gaming applications with less serious requirements. And gamers who want to save money and run more or less modern games should give preference to the i5 series from Intel or Ryzen 5 from AMD.

As for office applications, there are no suitable models for them in 2017 - all these programs run perfectly on PCs with processors released several years ago.

CES2017: Processors of 2017

Everything that was shown at #CES2017 about central and hybrid processors: Intel Kaby Lake, AMD Ryzen Summit Ridge, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835.