Why are intel CPUs so powerfull?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

tlavanway3

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2014
232
3
18,695
I have never understood why people like AMD over intel, the only thing AMD has over intel is Lower price, but what i have noticed is that almost every intel cpu is more powerful then its AMD counterpart. I have also noticed that an Intel duel core (i3-6100) is more powerfull then a 8 core AMD cpu (FX 8370) How are intel cpu's so powerful even when they lack the amount of cores that AMD cpu's seem to hand out like candy, it just dont make sense to me, a duel core being better at gaming then a 8 core (fx 8370) i want somebody tell me, Why is it that Intel cpu's are so badass despite the lower amount of cores.
 
Solution
U
AMD was ahead for quite a while. Intel used illegal business practices to keep AMD products from being used by manufactures and poured tons of money into R&D so they could catch back up and then pass them. Since Intel managed to keep AMD from gaining market share by illegal activity, AMD never had anywhere close to a comparable budget for R&D and eventually fell behind.

At the moment Intel's design has greater IPC and higher per core performance and AMDs are designed around more cores. You can't compare based on core count or clock frequency across different architectures. That doesn't make any sense.
Sort by date Sort by votes
Martell1977

Martell1977

Splendid
Oct 26, 2010
3,846
3
24,960
As mentioned, Intel's development budget is enormous. But a more direct answer is that Intel's architecture is more efficient than AMD's, plus there is a choke point for the cores at each module. The dual cores of each module share some resources and thus hinders it a bit. Intel's dual core can be faster in some programs, but the AMD CPU is better in programs that can use all of its cores, so it depends on how well threaded the program's you are using are.

AMD has a new architecture on the horizon and it will be similar to Intel's as far as hyperthreading and cores. IPC is supposed to be greatly improved and energy efficiency as well, mostly due to the smaller lithography. AMD has some great and competitive products, but Intel has released 4 generations of Core CPU's since then. Instead of trying to improve the current architecture, they put their money on something new. That;s is why they are still selling the same CPU's for so many years.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
H

HEXiT

Champion
Mar 13, 2011
10,957
13
51,965
its down to the efficiency of the architecture node size, and the transistor count. which is some where in the region of 1.3-1.9 billion depending on the chip version. (from what i can find)

the amd 8 core 4 module tops out at about 1.2billion.
so the intel is on a smaller process and has more transisters per core which gives it a real advantage even while it runs slower and has less cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

sizzling

Titan
Oct 18, 2006
27,231
3,301
112,240
There was a time, albeit long ago when AMD was at least on a level with Intel and was probably ahead. Intel have since reacted and have thrown a lot at ensuring they produce the best and get ahead and stay ahead. It now looks like AMD have a mountain to climb on a fraction of the budget
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
U

unksol

Splendid
Sep 12, 2011
7,060
0
27,960
AMD was ahead for quite a while. Intel used illegal business practices to keep AMD products from being used by manufactures and poured tons of money into R&D so they could catch back up and then pass them. Since Intel managed to keep AMD from gaining market share by illegal activity, AMD never had anywhere close to a comparable budget for R&D and eventually fell behind.

At the moment Intel's design has greater IPC and higher per core performance and AMDs are designed around more cores. You can't compare based on core count or clock frequency across different architectures. That doesn't make any sense.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom