Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

[Solved] AMD equivalent of Intel i7?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 14, 2012 12:05:06 PM

[Solved] AMD equivalent of Intel i7? This question has [solved] in front of it but I don't seem to see the answer on the 'Tom's Hardware' site. Can someone tell me how to find it here? Thank you.
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2012 12:58:09 PM

AMD has already confirmed that they are exiting the performance market to continue into their doomed low end market which will be eaten away at the top by Intel, and bottom my a plethora of ARM manufacturers that will be invading the desktop space with WinRT later this year.
If you need a high end CPU then Intel i7 is the way to go. The LGA 1155 platform is great for most things, while the 2011 platform is for content creation professionals and quad GPU game rigs. There is also a Duel 2011 Xeon platform available if you need absolutely insane amounts of processing.

The fastest AMD is the FX-8150 which in benchmarks trades blows with the i5 2500K, and only keeps up with the LGA1155 i7 cpus in some server applications, while the LGA 2011 i7 cpus are in a whole different league of performance.

I love AMD, and they make quality stuff, but they are simply not interested in competing with Intel at the moment, and are only a good pick for their low end solutions, and even then they trade blows with Intel depending on the workload you have.
Score
0
Related resources
a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
June 14, 2012 3:33:34 PM

AMD's equivalent to a 1st general Core i7 CPU will be the upcoming release of Piledriver if it can manage at least a 10% performance improvement over the Phenom II / FX CPUs.
Score
0
a c 116 à CPUs
June 14, 2012 4:18:57 PM

jaguarskx said:
AMD's equivalent to a 1st general Core i7 CPU will be the upcoming release of Piledriver if it can manage at least a 10% performance improvement over the Phenom II / FX CPUs.

And based on Tom's review of desktop A10 today seems to indicate a 10-15% improvement in most cases, so not quite out of the game anymore.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2012 4:50:07 PM

InvalidError said:
And based on Tom's review of desktop A10 today seems to indicate a 10-15% improvement in most cases, so not quite out of the game anymore.

Still out of the game. That 10-15% gets them up to a 1st gen i7... which is currently 2.5 years old, and will be ~3 years old by the time it is released. We are expecting a 10-20% CPU increase for the next gen i7 Haswell chips which will be released just a few months later, so AMD will be even further behind again.
It's frustrating when such a good company can't keep up, but they really are out of the game for the foreseeable future, with the exception of a few very specific applications.
Score
0
a c 116 à CPUs
June 14, 2012 5:02:32 PM

CaedenV said:
Still out of the game. That 10-15% gets them up to a 1st gen i7... which is currently 2.5 years old, and will be ~3 years old by the time it is released.

Trinity chips are released to OEMs, which means you may start seeing OEM designs with Trinity APUs on the market in the next few weeks. One thing that might rub AMD fans the wrong way this time around though is the new FM2 socket they require, so no point in buying OEM chips while there are no retail boards to plug them into.


CaedenV said:
We are expecting a 10-20% CPU increase for the next gen i7 Haswell chips which will be released just a few months later, so AMD will be even further behind again.

Haswell is still about a year away assuming Intel does not decide to delay the launch as they did with IB due to lack of competition and excess stock to clear.
Score
0
a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
June 14, 2012 9:28:38 PM

InvalidError said:
And based on Tom's review of desktop A10 today seems to indicate a 10-15% improvement in most cases, so not quite out of the game anymore.


The problem with the review is that there are no Intel CPUs used in the benchmarks. Trinity is only compared to Llano. The Llano core is more or less based on an Athlon II CPU core. A 1st gen Core i3/i5/i7 has around a 20% - 25% more processing power than Llano assuming the same clock speed. Therefore, even Trinity is 10% - 15% faster than Llano, it is still slower than a 1st gen Core i3/i5/i7. From the benchmarks, the CPU performance increase looks to be closer to 10% than 15%. That more or less puts Trinity at the Phenom II CPU performance level.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
June 14, 2012 10:44:39 PM

I'm not a fanboy, I am actually running an AMD system now, but there is nothing in AMD's lineup that even comes close to modern i7s. It's just the truth. If anybody tells you otherwise, they're lying.
Score
0
a c 116 à CPUs
June 14, 2012 11:26:10 PM

jaguarskx said:
The problem with the review is that there are no Intel CPUs used in the benchmarks.

Since AMD is no longer competing in terms of raw CPU performance but rather on CPU+IGP balance while Intel is heavily biased toward CPU alone and has no half-decent IGP to compare against, omitting Intel chips is not that much of a loss.

If Intel had something like an i3-3330 with HD4500 IGP to pit against the A10-5700, now that could be interesting for the value-oriented mid-range segment.

Not much point in including the "competition's" products when we know beforehand that CPU results will be one-sided in Intel's favor and IGP results will be one-sided in AMD's favor. They are not competing, they are going after two completely different markets.
Score
0
a c 471 à CPUs
a c 118 À AMD
June 15, 2012 1:49:54 AM

InvalidError said:
Since AMD is no longer competing in terms of raw CPU performance but rather on CPU+IGP balance while Intel is heavily biased toward CPU alone and has no half-decent IGP to compare against, omitting Intel chips is not that much of a loss.

If Intel had something like an i3-3330 with HD4500 IGP to pit against the A10-5700, now that could be interesting for the value-oriented mid-range segment.

Not much point in including the "competition's" products when we know beforehand that CPU results will be one-sided in Intel's favor and IGP results will be one-sided in AMD's favor. They are not competing, they are going after two completely different markets.


However, this thread is about which AMD CPU is comparable to an i7; so it is more about the CPU core processing power than it is the combination CPU + integrated graphic core. It's generally known that AMD's APU graphic graphic performs better than the HD 3000. The Intel HD 4000 actually does a bit better; it's almost comparable to the graphic core in the A8-3850. I've recall seeing it perform better in a few games like Batman Arkham City, but it loose more than wins compared to that Llano APU.

All that review shows is that Trinity is better than Llano and it seems the CPU processing capabilities is not very far off from Phenom II. So yes, you are correct that Trinity bridges the gap from Llano to a 1st gen Core i3/i5/i7 CPU. AMD just needs around another 15% to be on par with those Intel CPUs.
Score
0
!