intel i5 4200u vs amd a10-5745m. which is better?

MysticBanana

Honorable
Aug 23, 2012
18
0
10,510
Looking at two different laptops with these processors in them and I was wondering which would be superior? The Intel notebook has a touchscreen and the amd doesn't. Also the amd is 200$ cheaper but it is really coming down to which CPU is superior. Which one of these CPU's will give me the most gaming performance/video editing performance/ multitasking potential?
 
Solution
I might be biased, but I have always had better luck with the lifespan of Intel CPUs. Once upon a time, AMD was a serious competitor, but their quality has dropped over the years and they don't seem to be keeping up in the speed/features departments. Even still, over the years of putting PCs back to running order, I have replaced more AMD CPUs that Intel and overall, had more issues with AMD hardware.

Stephen Thurman

Honorable
Aug 15, 2013
19
0
10,540
I might be biased, but I have always had better luck with the lifespan of Intel CPUs. Once upon a time, AMD was a serious competitor, but their quality has dropped over the years and they don't seem to be keeping up in the speed/features departments. Even still, over the years of putting PCs back to running order, I have replaced more AMD CPUs that Intel and overall, had more issues with AMD hardware.
 
Solution

AvidApproximation

Honorable
Aug 22, 2013
1
0
10,510
I also have the same question. Taking the reliability into account in my decision between the two, I would also like to know (as I'm sure MysticBanana would as well) which is superior based on strictly performance? I, myself, will be using it for less gaming and editing but more for multitasking using programs that consume more resources on average if that sways the decision.
 
The Intel i5-4200U (1.6GHz - 2.6GHz) is a dual core CPU with Hyper Threading. The AMD A10-5475m (2.1GHz - 2.9GHz) is a quad core CPU. Intel CPUs can process more instructions per 1Hz than AMD can, thus at the same clockspeed Intel CPUs are more powerful. However, the A10-5475m has 2 more core which can help make up the difference as long as the game / program can make use of the 2 extra cores.

For example, if you play Skyrim on an Intel CPU and AMD APU with the same graphics card, the Intel CPU will have a large performance lead. It's basically not even a contest. Hitman is a game that can make use of 4+ cores. There is definitely an increase in performance going from a quad core FX-4xxx CPU to a 6 core FX-6300. The FX-8350 provides better performance than the FX-6300, but that's basically due to the extra 500MHz rather than the two extra cores (8 in total). Unfortunately, Intel's dual core i3-3220 performance is right behind the FX-8350. So assuming both laptops had the same graphics card, Intel would likely win the benchmark contest.

But fear not, the bane of all gaming PCs (even with high end expensive CPUs and GPUs) is Crysis 3. It both CPU and GPU intensive and AMD's A10-5475m will defeat it's dual core nemesis, the i5-4200u. But I would say most games are not very CPU intensive (like BioShock) which means both Intel's CPU and AMD's APU will provided about the same level of performance assume both uses the same graphics card.

On the GPU side or actual iGPU (integrated GPU), AMD's Radeon HD 8610m is expected to have about the same performance as the Intel HD 4600. If true, then the HD 8610m is more powerful than the Intel HD 4400 that is in the Core i5-4200u. No benchmarks exists yet.

Getting to video editing / encoding performance. If you plan on using a program that relies strictly on the CPU, then I would say AMD will give you better performance because it has 4 cores vs. 2 core for Intel. Even though those cores are less powerful, I believe AMD's APU will provide a small performance advantage.

However, Intel has a trick up it's sleeve called Quick Sync. Quick Sync leverages Intel's HD graphics core to help accelerate video encoding to be 3x - 4x faster than without using it. In this scenario AMD's APU simply has no chance, it's not a contest AMD's APU can even graceful show up in last place.

AMD can also use OpenCL to help improve performance, but from what I recall the improvement is that not very much. Definitely nothing as dramatics as which Quick Sync is capable of doing. However, in order to take advantage of Quick Sync or OpenCL, the video editing / encoding program must be designed to use those technologies. Otherwise, it's simply the good 'ol CPU that going to be relied upon.

In the end it is somewhat tough. Intel's stronger CPU cores are definitely something that AMD must contend with. Even though AMD has more cores, they are relatively weak in comparison. On the graphics side of the spectrum, the HD 8610m is very likely to be more powerful than the Intel HD 4400. Therefore, from a gaming perspective going with AMD is likely the better choice.