Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fastest AMD or Intel CPU

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 3, 2012 9:25:17 AM

I'm planning to build a system for faster movie downloads & watching movies

Please bear with my ignorance in this field, I would appreciate your help.

I have 8mbps LAN connection and download torrents. I watch movies and do basic internet surfing.

Though the i5-2500k looks impressive and all benchmarks support it. I read good reviews about AMD Processors also. I dunno how much difference would it make in the real sense.

I'm totally a non gamer so looking for graphics which will be best for watching movies only.

Kindly suggest. Budget is not a constraint but at the same time it shud not be an overkill.

More about : fastest amd intel cpu

a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 9:38:13 AM

If you are not a gamer an dual core is enough AMD or INTEL. For downloading and watching movies you need a good hdd. Your activities are not cpu hungry.

a c 172 à CPUs
January 3, 2012 9:42:59 AM

Movie downloads are tied to to your internet connection. Just about anything will work.

Any modern, or even semi-modern dual core CPU will work. And if all you want to do is watch movies, any $50 or $60 video card will work.
Related resources
January 3, 2012 9:46:56 AM

For your specific task, most of the current low end CPU/GPU combos will suffice along with 4gb of ram and a decent motherboard.

Something like this for AMD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Or this for Intel:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If you decide the integrated video is not to your liking, you can always ad a low end HTPC video card such as the AMD 5450, but you really should not need it.

4gb DDR3 RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
January 3, 2012 11:20:16 AM

Which CPU is faster for downloading movies and surfing net?

Which is better price/performance?

Which is better for watching movies.
January 3, 2012 11:22:58 AM

I read on the forums that though AMDs are very well priced but run on higher temperatures.

And some opinions said that AMDs are more durable than an Intel?
January 3, 2012 11:26:29 AM

I would like my system to last me atleast 5 years and would like to go for Quad Core to make it somewhat future proof. Please suggest.
January 3, 2012 11:35:12 AM

For those tasks there's hardly any difference. I would buy the A8-3850. Escpecially if you are going to use the integrated GPU instead of a discrete graphics card.
January 3, 2012 11:35:52 AM

None, get an i3.
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 11:40:01 AM

Quote:
None, get an i3.


+1

There's no need for any real performance for web surfing and watching movies.

You could even get away with a cheaper AMD CPU (AMD Llano A4 3400). Any dual core that supports on-board graphics is going to be fine :) 
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 11:44:28 AM

i3-2100 (Dual core with 4 Threads) and a Z68 motherboard would be a good choice.

The CPU is only Dual Core - although a very good one. The motherboard would allow you to upgrade to an i5 or i7 in the future should you desire more performance.

As stated previously, downloading from the Internet is tied more or less solely to your internet connection/network card. Having a Quad-Core is going to provide no greater performance here, nor within movie playback.

4GB 1333MHz RAM is going to be plenty (1.5v if using a SandyBridge CPU).




January 3, 2012 11:45:03 AM

I was looking for a quad Core processor atleast so that the System is somewhat future proof. I want to stay with the system for next 5 years.
a c 202 à CPUs
January 3, 2012 11:49:49 AM

If you not planning to get a discreet graphics card and want native USB3/Sata3 support with decent graphics capability take the AMD A8.

If you just want a more powerful processor with minimal media functionality take the i5.

A quad would help for future-proofing but at the i5 is very expensive. I would take the A8 for any media orientated non-gaming build.
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 11:50:43 AM

Quote:
I was looking for a quad Core processor atleast so that the System is somewhat future proof. I want to stay with the system for next 5 years.


i5-2500k with a Z68 motherboard is by far the best choice in that case. Both the on-board GPU and CPU clock speeds can be over-clocked providing better performance than anything AMD has to offer.

i5-2500k is fairly distinctly the best value for money CPU currently available. (However bare in mind, its still much more performance than your system is likely to ever use).

----

Personally I built an i5-2500k build + GTX 560Ti, with the intention of gaming, 6 months on, I've still barely spent more than about 10 hours playing games on it, and mainly use it for web browsing. In retrospect I wish I had spent a lot less and gone with i3-2100 and much cheaper GPU.
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 11:58:38 AM

akhileshgrover said:
I'm planning to build a system for faster movie downloads & watching movies

Please bear with my ignorance in this field, I would appreciate your help.

I have 8mbps LAN connection and download torrents. I watch movies and do basic internet surfing.

Though the i5-2500k looks impressive and all benchmarks support it. I read good reviews about AMD Processors also. I dunno how much difference would it make in the real sense.

I'm totally a non gamer so looking for graphics which will be best for watching movies only.

Kindly suggest. Budget is not a constraint but at the same time it shud not be an overkill.


amd's apu is perfect for this kind of stuff
no match for apu for these purpose
and cpu doesnot affect download speed
a c 80 à CPUs
January 3, 2012 12:07:15 PM

if you want to get a basic pc you movie playback and surfing, an amd a8 based pc would be able to suit your needs. or if you can wait till april, you could get intel's newest ivy bridge cpus.
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 12:07:36 PM

Quote:
I was looking for a quad Core processor atleast so that the System is somewhat future proof. I want to stay with the system for next 5 years.


for future proof, i5-2500k is best choice, and a gtx 560 graphics card.
a c 202 à CPUs
January 3, 2012 12:11:25 PM

Quote:
for future proof, i5-2500k is best choice, and a gtx 560 graphics card.


He does not game????
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2012 12:13:39 PM

This next topics has been merged by Mousemonkey
  • Which is faster A8-3850 or i5-2500k
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 12:16:11 PM

    truegenius said:
    for future proof, i5-2500k is best choice, and a gtx 560 graphics card.


    Novuake said:
    He does not game????


    +1 A discrete GPU wouldn't be necessary unless gaming, or using video editing applications that are heavily graphic-intensive. For watching media, and flash based video's/games, on-board GPU will be more than enough.
    January 3, 2012 12:20:19 PM

    akhileshgrover said:
    I would like my system to last me atleast 5 years and would like to go for Quad Core to make it somewhat future proof. Please suggest.


    If you want future proofing you should probably forget about Llano and wait for Trinity CPUs because socket FM1 is a deadend as far as upgrades go. Trinity is a FM2 socket. They should be out in the first quarter if I remember correctly. But if you're in a hurry and don't mind getting an FM1 socket and need a quadcore then I would reccomend something like A6-3650/A8-3850

    ]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103943]
    ]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103942]
    a c 471 à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 12:25:29 PM

    akhileshgrover said:
    I read on the forums that though AMDs are very well priced but run on higher temperatures.

    And some opinions said that AMDs are more durable than an Intel?


    Generally speaking, AMD CPUs use a little more electricity than Intel CPUs. Some of their higher end CPUs use significantly more even though overall processing power is less than Intel's CPUs.

    As for "more durable"... AMD switches socket types less often than Intel so in a sense the motherboard lasts longer because it is possible to upgrade to a new processor; if it will be supported. Intel switches socket types about every 2 years. So if you don't upgrade often, then you are forced to buy a new motherboard as well.

    AMD's Llano A4/A6/A8 APUs are socket FM1. There is no future upgrade path. Trinity APUs are expected to replace Llano this year with socket FM2.

    The Phenom II X2/X4/X6 are basic socket AM3/AM3+. Socket AM3 support has been dropped. AMD's current FX CPUs (Bulldozer) uses socket AM3+. Their next CPU, Piledriver, is also expected to use socket AM3+ and is coming out later this year. However, AMD has announced they are bowing out of the performance consumer CPU market so Piledriver is likely to be their last CPU. They are focusing on their APU design instead.

    Intel's current socket 1155 for Sandy Bridge / Ivy Bridge (mid-2012) will survive until around mid-2013 when their next CPU, Haswell, is released. It will be socket 1150 and it cannot used with a socket 1155 motherboard.
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 12:51:17 PM

    AdrianPerry said:
    +1 A discrete GPU wouldn't be necessary unless gaming, or using video editing applications that are heavily graphic-intensive. For watching media, and flash based video's/games, on-board GPU will be more than enough.


    op wants for internet and to be future proof (don't want to upgrade for five years) so a graphics card is needed to be future proof
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 12:59:26 PM

    truegenius said:
    op wants for internet and to be future proof (don't want to upgrade for five years) so a graphics card is needed to be future proof


    No.....

    That would still depend on what the OP plans to use the system for in the future.....If the build is still going to be used simply for web browsing and watching media, now and in 5 years time, then the built in graphics would still be fine. There would be no need to buy a GPU unless the system was to be used for gaming, or to be used with heavily graphic intensive applications (such as video rendering).

    If suddenly flash media on websites DOES need a GPU for whatever crazy reason....the OP can always buy one at a later date, much much cheaper than today's prices. There's no point spending money now, on something that's likely to never be used. Especially on a GTX 560Ti, as its a fairly expensive card.

    January 3, 2012 1:00:21 PM

    truegenius said:
    op wants for internet and to be future proof (don't want to upgrade for five years) so a graphics card is needed to be future proof


    It has nothing to do with a graphics card, and there is no such thing as future proofing. Next year some new fangled gizmo will come out and you will need entirely different hardware to run it. That is what the manufacturers are in business for.

    For the OP's originally stated purpose, the low cost integrated systems suggested will be more than enough for a good while.
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:08:49 PM

    tlmck said:
    It has nothing to do with a graphics card, and there is no such thing as future proofing. Next year some new fangled gizmo will come out and you will need entirely different hardware to run it. That is what the manufacturers are in business for.

    For the OP's originally stated purpose, the low cost integrated systems suggested will be more than enough for a good while.


    is that so,
    then p4 will be enough for internet
    don't you think
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:13:26 PM

    truegenius said:
    is that so,
    then p4 will be enough for internet
    don't you think


    Yes it probably would. However it wouldn't be all that responsive and when having multiple tabs/webpages open a P4 will most likely struggle, as will the RAM. A simple Dual Core with 2-4GB (ideally 4GB RAM) DDR3 would be perfect.

    The machine I'm temporarily using at work is very "legacy" - (P4 2.8GHz, with 768MB RAM) and its perfectly fine for web browsing with 1-5 tabs open, its only when I open my Outlook and a few more tabs on Chrome the machine begins to struggle (purely due to the RAM the CPU generally is quite low usage).
    January 3, 2012 1:13:40 PM

    i3 2100 and H61 mobo would suffice. The integrated HD3000 is enough for movies.
    January 3, 2012 1:21:10 PM

    truegenius said:
    is that so,
    then p4 will be enough for internet
    don't you think


    Actually it would as the internet does not care what speed your CPU or even your GPU is, nor what OS you have for that matter. It is just how fast your connection is. I still have a single core Celeron 430 with integrated Intel 950 graphics onboard and it surfs the internet just fine running Linux. My laptop only has an AMD 2650e with integrated AMD x1250 graphics and does just fine as well. And of course I also have a netbook with an ATOM, 1gb ram, and integrated Intel video. Surfs the internet like a champ. Plays videos, music, whatever I want to do.
    January 3, 2012 1:25:22 PM

    AdrianPerry said:
    Yes it probably would. However it wouldn't be all that responsive and when having multiple tabs/webpages open a P4 will most likely struggle, as will the RAM. A simple Dual Core with 2-4GB (ideally 4GB RAM) DDR3 would be perfect.

    The machine I'm temporarily using at work is very "legacy" - (P4 2.8GHz, with 768MB RAM) and its perfectly fine for web browsing with 1-5 tabs open, its only when I open my Outlook and a few more tabs on Chrome the machine begins to struggle (purely due to the RAM the CPU generally is quite low usage).


    Exactly. But the OP did not mention having 5 tabs open and running all those other programs. His original request was quite simple and to the point. On that basis, the minimal systems suggested are more than adequate.
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:25:58 PM

    so no need to have a Fastest AMD or Intel CPU, don't you think

    I think NO
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:26:42 PM

    tlmck said:
    Exactly. But the OP did not mention having 5 tabs open and running all those other programs. His original request was quite simple and to the point. On that basis, the minimal systems suggested are more than adequate.


    +1
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:28:15 PM

    truegenius said:
    so no need to have a Fastest AMD or Intel CPU, don't you think

    I think NO


    That's because your wrong, and misinformed.

    misinformed - past participle, past tense of mis·in·form
    Verb: Give false or inaccurate information.

    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:35:05 PM

    AdrianPerry said:
    That's because your wrong, and misinformed.

    misinformed - past participle, past tense of mis·in·form
    Verb: Give false or inaccurate information.


    :??: 
    a b à CPUs
    January 3, 2012 1:39:55 PM

    AdrianPerry said:
    Yes it probably would. However it wouldn't be all that responsive and when having multiple tabs/webpages open a P4 will most likely struggle, as will the RAM. A simple Dual Core with 2-4GB (ideally 4GB RAM) DDR3 would be perfect.

    The machine I'm temporarily using at work is very "legacy" - (P4 2.8GHz, with 768MB RAM) and its perfectly fine for web browsing with 1-5 tabs open, its only when I open my Outlook and a few more tabs on Chrome the machine begins to struggle (purely due to the RAM the CPU generally is quite low usage).


    '1-5 tabs'

    seems like your office computer are slower than my java based basic mobile phone i.e, k660i

    because i use around 10-15 tabs in my phone without any lagging (opera mini)
    January 3, 2012 1:57:40 PM

    if you want to have at least a quad core that will last 5 years plus. I would suggest the cheapest quad core modern day AMD or Intel and use the integrated Graphics with 4gb of RAM. The CPU will not determine your download speed nor your internet browsing experience. I would call my ISP and upgrade my internet from 8mbps to something a bit faster if you plan to do a lot of downloading. I do a lot of 1080p movie watching and downloading so I got a i5 650 4gb RAM 2tb hdd and a cheap $28 GPU since the integrated couldn't play 1080p/24p. I also upgraded my internet to 24mbps/2mbps DSL
    !