Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Intel vs. Amd

Tags:
  • Systems
  • Intel
  • AMD
Last response: in Systems
Share
June 29, 2014 7:03:49 PM

So, these 2 brands are put up against each other alot. Witch of these 2 do you think i should get?
Im talking about gaming, so i want to know witch i should get. I know intel is better, but ive heard from some people that for the money you pay your not getting very much more fps. Then from others ive heard that intel destroys AMD.

So, witch should i get? Will intel be worth the money? Witch runs hotter? Ive heard diffrent sides for witch runs hotter so id like to know. And if i were to get intel, i will hopefully get some good water cooling, because of that should i get haswell or ivy bridge?

More about : intel amd

June 29, 2014 7:14:40 PM

It's not quite that simple a question. It all depends on your needs and your budget.

Now, generally speaking, Intel CPUs perform a bit better than AMD CPUs in gaming, depending on which CPUs we're talking about and which particular games. Even with more cores being utilized, it's not an binary thing - just because a program utilizes more cores doesn't mean that you necessarily see a big boost from more weaker cores relative to fewer stronger cores. Some software is more suited to parallel tasks than others, the less the software relies on very parallel tasks, the less marginal benefit there is for additional cores (this is essentially what is called Amdahl's law). On software such as this, AMD CPUs perform very well. In games, single core performance is still the most important, though AMD frequently puts up very respectable fights against Intel.

Think of it this way. Me, you, and Albert Einstein are hanging out. Einstein's going to wash his car and the two of us are going to wash your car. That task is highly parallel and we will probably finish in about half the time. Now, imagine we're all going to drive to the beach. The two of us together aren't going to be able to get there any faster in your car than Al will in his car. For a mixed task, we're baking cakes. The two of us can save time over Albert in part of the task (I can crack the eggs while you measure the flour), but we're limited because we can't actually bake the cake any faster than Albert bakes his. Now, imagine if Albert is faster at cracking the eggs and measuring the flour than either of us are, we may lose that time advantage (and if he's really skilled, may still beat us, despite our multi-core cooking team). This is an oversimplification, but it's just an illustration.
m
0
l
June 29, 2014 7:15:13 PM

For gaming, I5's are way better. It depends where in the world you are. In the u.k. an entry level i5 is cheaper than the A.M.D. 8350 cpu.
It is a big subject, but I would not recommend an A.M.D. cpu for anything but video editing and coding.
m
0
l
Related resources
June 29, 2014 7:22:27 PM

DSzymborski said:
It's not quite that simple a question. It all depends on your needs and your budget.

Now, generally speaking, Intel CPUs perform a bit better than AMD CPUs in gaming, depending on which CPUs we're talking about and which particular games. Even with more cores being utilized, it's not an binary thing - just because a program utilizes more cores doesn't mean that you necessarily see a big boost from more weaker cores relative to fewer stronger cores. Some software is more suited to parallel tasks than others, the less the software relies on very parallel tasks, the less marginal benefit there is for additional cores (this is essentially what is called Amdahl's law). On software such as this, AMD CPUs perform very well. In games, single core performance is still the most important, though AMD frequently puts up very respectable fights against Intel.


Well, i play bf4, ps2, minecraft, and later gta v, i have a budget of $1000 CAD, so not quite as much as a $1000 american build, but close. The main reason i think i should go intel over AMD is because i plan on doing youtube, video editing and such, but maybe i shouldn't? I can't go with a i7 right now, but later if i got a i5 i will upgrade too the i7.

m
0
l
June 29, 2014 7:23:38 PM

tea urchin said:
For gaming, I5's are way better. It depends where in the world you are. In the u.k. an entry level i5 is cheaper than the A.M.D. 8350 cpu.
It is a big subject, but I would not recommend an A.M.D. cpu for anything but video editing and coding.


Hmm, i hear ya, if i were to be video editing would a 8350 be better or i7 4790k?

m
0
l
a c 255 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
June 29, 2014 7:35:26 PM

An 8350 is better than a 4670K or 4690K in rendering (and that's about it, but the 4790K, 4770K, actually most any i7 K beats the 8350 in rendering in either Haswell or IB CPUs)
m
0
l
June 29, 2014 7:39:00 PM

Tradesman1 said:
An 8350 is better than a 4670K or 4690K in rendering (and that's about it, but the 4790K, 4770K, actually most any i7 K beats the 8350 in rendering in either Haswell or IB CPUs)


So would my best choice now, since i can afford it go with a i5 and then later upgrade to a i7 for video rendering and editing?
m
0
l
a c 255 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
June 29, 2014 7:48:19 PM

If thinking that route would go 4670K on a Z97 mobo, starting at maybe the Asus Z97-A, that way down the road you could go to the Devils canyon i7 4790K or even wait for Broadwell that will run on the Z97 mobos when released
m
0
l
June 29, 2014 7:54:48 PM

Tradesman1 said:
If thinking that route would go 4670K on a Z97 mobo, starting at maybe the Asus Z97-A, that way down the road you could go to the Devils canyon i7 4790K or even wait for Broadwell that will run on the Z97 mobos when released


So i5 4690k is not worth it? Just get the i5 4670k?


m
0
l
a b å Intel
a b À AMD
June 29, 2014 8:01:56 PM

I think it's a waste of money going from an i5 to i7 in such a short amount of time, even with a step up to broadwell. The 1230v3 is the same price as an i5. It should max any game with a capable gpu and you get better multi threaded performance. Although a nicely oc i5 should get similar multithreaded performance, the cost for a better cooler and mobo means it costs more.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 255 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
June 29, 2014 8:05:14 PM

jailz said:
Tradesman1 said:
If thinking that route would go 4670K on a Z97 mobo, starting at maybe the Asus Z97-A, that way down the road you could go to the Devils canyon i7 4790K or even wait for Broadwell that will run on the Z97 mobos when released


So i5 4690k is not worth it? Just get the i5 4670k?



____________

Either/or depending on where you are and shop the 4690K may run higher pricewise (but it's worth it), depends on your budget...

Share
June 29, 2014 8:11:41 PM

Tradesman1 said:
jailz said:
Tradesman1 said:
If thinking that route would go 4670K on a Z97 mobo, starting at maybe the Asus Z97-A, that way down the road you could go to the Devils canyon i7 4790K or even wait for Broadwell that will run on the Z97 mobos when released


So i5 4690k is not worth it? Just get the i5 4670k?



____________

Either/or depending on where you are and shop the 4690K may run higher pricewise (but it's worth it), depends on your budget...




Whats the big diffrence between them?

m
0
l
a c 255 å Intel
a c 290 À AMD
June 29, 2014 8:26:35 PM

The newer Haswell Devils Canyon refresh CPU has a higher base clock (nominal), but also incorporates a new TIM which enhances the OC ability of the chips, and pairs with the Z97 chipset to allow for slightly better OCing at lower temps and voltages i.e. I've been running my Z87 Hero with a 4770K, when I picked up the Z97 Hero, I took my same 4770K out of the Z87 and put it in the 97 and replaced a spare in the Z87, anyway - same exact CPU that was in the Z87 at 4.6 runs 4.7/8 on the Z97 with less voltage....have put a number of sets of DRAM through the Z97 w/ no problems and they OC better in the Z97, overall it runs cooler (systemwise) and I was quite happy with the Z87, it was (IMO) probably the best Z87 out there
m
0
l
!