Why AMD is cheaper than INTEL

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
jayadratha

jayadratha

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
427
0
18,790
Can anyone tell me why AMD is cheaper than INTEL. But AMD gives more feature than INTEL. I didn't use AMD. But now planning to buy a new rig. So please anyone tell me Difference between AMD CPU & INTEL CPU. All the cons & pros. Thank you
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460
Intel has more powerful cores, AMD gives you more cores... however, a i7 3770 using Hyper threading will be beat by a FX 8350. Because the FX 8350 is using actual cores. AMD also offers a better value IMO, But if I could afford it, I'd buy a hexacore i7 (12 threads).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

feeblepenguin

Honorable
Dec 13, 2012
143
0
10,690
Intel i3- best for low to mid end gaming, w/ 2 hyperthreaded cores.
AMD A series (a6 a8 a10) decent processors, but with excellent integrated grfx, for those without dedicated gfx.
Intel i5 (especially 3570k) arguably the best processors for gaming. most games only use 4 cores, and for 4 cores, these are best.
AMD fx series, phenoms. good gaming proc's, but 4xxx are overpriced when compared to i3s, and phenoms are old. The 8350 is excellent, but most games don't use more than for cores (but with the ps4's 8 x86 cores, this proc. will probly will be much more useful in the future)
I7's- the best for when a proc. is needed (like compressing files, etc) but expensive
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ikes9711

ikes9711

Honorable
Nov 15, 2012
494
0
10,860
The main difference between the company's cpu's are the single core performance. Intel, as of now, has had much higher single core performance. That is why you see most Intel cpu's with 4 cores. With AMD they provide more cores and are more focused on budget. Also why the top AMD cpu is an octa-core. AMD is always going to give you a better price for what you are buying, as a drawback they don't give quite the power of the higher end Intel cpus
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rainbueza

rainbueza

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2012
162
0
18,690
Since Intel is more famous than AMD and Intel is a top choice for most users, AMD has to put their prices lower than Intel for them to penetrate the market.
For example, in smartphones competition, Samsung Galaxy phones is more affordable when they entered the market than the Apple's iPhone because of course, if you have a big budget, you might think, why would you go for samsung if you can buy an iPhone. and now you can see that samsung has beaten the apple in terms of sales. same thing with the processors, Intel is a top choice for most users so AMD's advantage is their lower price for the users to buy its products, then they will notice that AMD is not that bad. Intel have always proven that they have better processors so they already built a reputation and people will buy them even at higher prices. but AMD has to prove that they can be better than Intel and the best way to show that is to give lower prices so people can buy them.

I do not believe that AMD is not as good as intel even if they have lower prices. The element of competition is the reason why they have lower prices than Intel. I currently use AMD platform. FX and Radeon.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jayadratha

jayadratha

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
427
0
18,790


now what should I say. I do all the things you mentioned. I.e gaming, app developing, image or video processing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
W

wdmfiber

Honorable
Dec 7, 2012
810
0
11,160
Because Intel sold Sandy Bridge processors for way cheaper than they could have and spoiled us all. And hardly anyone remembers that a mid level CPU used to sell for $850 (example is Intel Q6600, release price).

Plus a lot of people are lazy and won't work. So the difference between $200 and $300 is alot to them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460
What?? Intel is "light years ahead?" If that was true, they would have offered the first 8 core desktop processor. I've even had Intel workers tell me AMD's newest offerings are decent... Even though the i7 is no competition when it comes to single thread performance.

If you bought a FX 8350 and OverClocked it, you would not notice the difference.

There was a study conducted with AMD vs Intel, They switched tags, people liked the "Intel" system better even though it had the AMD processor in it.

The only reason as to why I'm buying an i7 for my next system, is to say that I have one... lol. Otherwise, I'd go AMD because It's cheaper and it's way decent. Still.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jayadratha

jayadratha

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
427
0
18,790


I'm telling that I heard that AMD's performance degrades more than INTEL.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
W

wdmfiber

Honorable
Dec 7, 2012
810
0
11,160

Hilarious, yet sad what people think.

However, AMD has nothing that matches up to an i5-2300 or above.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

Which is another answer to your question. AMD CPU's are priced accordingly.
(also AMD doesn't have an EIGHT core CPU, their 8 core CPU's feature simulated cores. It's all based on a 4 module shared resource system and it doesn't work very well)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
coffeecoffee

coffeecoffee

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2009
331
0
18,810


While that is true, AMD CPUs are priced accordingly in relation to Intels. Basically.. your paying more... for more. There's nothing wrong with that. On a completely different note. AMD APUs are blowing Intel CPUs out of the water for their value [graphics + CPU package in one] for budget oriented users. On top of which, their APUs are every power efficient. In fact, you can do some nice light gaming on a AMD A10-5800k APU. Here's an example. Keep in mind he's running AND recording on a A10-5800k. Quite impressive if you ask me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qluPwppvWU

Coffee~
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
griptwister

griptwister

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2012
1,437
0
19,460
For overclocking, Go AMD. For raw performance and no overclocking, Go Intel.

Go intel if you have the money. Go AMD if you're on a budget. That simple.

Yes, 4 Modules. But each module has 2 physical cores. Get your facts straight. They're not independent cores, but they're cores. Not threads.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
X

xeon3d

Honorable
Jul 24, 2012
5
0
10,510
amd is pocket friendly with decent performance.intel for best performance with excellent power consumption efficiency though it will be costlier.
keep in mind that intel like to release new socket whenever they want ,amd has a better upgrade path as of now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jayadratha

jayadratha

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
427
0
18,790

I don't change processor so much, and didn't use AMD before. So my question is if i buy AMD then will I be without problem atleast for 5years?? that is without significant performance reduce..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jayadratha

jayadratha

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
427
0
18,790


Yes this is true.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
jossrik

jossrik

Distinguished
Sep 26, 2002
1,549
1
20,915
In reguards to what you should buy, take a look at the rest of the system you're building. If you've got a 7870 planned for that bad boy, then an AMD chip will do you up just fine. Pair of 680s in SLI, you're gonna want the I7 most likely. How long do you plan to use this machine personally? Are you wanting the best or the best bang for the dollar? The prices on both companies chips are right in line with performance, give or take a few frames. Also important to looksee at the resolutions you're playing at or planning on playing at. 1920X1080, you probably don't need a 3570k. Blashpemy, I know. I have one with a 7870 XT I just built and I get 200FPS in some games, that being said, I don't notice that much of a difference from my old Phenom 965 BE + 5770, even though with that I was only getting around 80 FPS (Both instances are with tweaks to eye candy, the 7870 has more candy, but the game seems about the same), I'm in a unique spot though, I'm on a 40in LED monitor, so I'm not right up against the screen.

If you're building a system for total less than a grand, I'd greatly consider an AMD build, over a grand, there's no reason not to get a 2500k or 3570k.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rdc85

rdc85

Honorable
Apr 29, 2012
2,943
0
13,460

+1

The Intel also have better cores (right now) performance and had better tech (and fabrication which they also own) so they can afford to stay in higher price point..

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sarinaide

Splendid
Jul 14, 2011
3,820
0
22,960
1) AMD occupy a lower market share and thus focus heavily on value orientated market namely the sub $200 market.

2) Intel's fabs allows them to recycle unused chips into the rest of its product line and keep prices high.

In terms of technology, those who have jumped onto the Intel bandwagon, the most advanced processor on the market is a APU, its just AMD and Intel are driving two different architectures. While AMD are using the heterogeneous and parallelism approach, intel are adopting the lower power, smaller die approach in effort to break into the mobile market, there is adequate sources suggesting that intel like IBM may pull out of the mainstream x86 market, not good for the enthusiast but it will leave it exclusively for AMD.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom