Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Which is better amd a6 or intel i3 for average use

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Desktops
  • Intel
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 11, 2012 6:31:25 AM

Hello,
I am buying a desktop. I only use the laptop for emailing and generally surfing the net. Which is better AMD A6 or Intel i 3?

More about : amd intel average

a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 11, 2012 6:37:37 AM

i3 is better for overall average use.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2012 6:48:10 AM

Is everything on Toms just going to be "intel" by default. What the Llano's offer is feature rich hardware with practicality across all spectrums of computer usage. The I3 is a fast efficient processor and nothing more, if surfing and word processing or some streaming is needed then save cash and get one of them fuddy duddy Pentium G chips, they are not that dissimilar to a i3 at a cheaper cost.

On the other hand you get the Llano, if you wait you will get a Trinity and honestly for the features and for budget and casual users it is a far better balance than any Intel low cost option.

http://www.miningweekly.com/article/sasol-looks-to-buil...
Score
0
Related resources
a c 487 à CPUs
a c 121 å Intel
a c 123 À AMD
September 11, 2012 6:51:43 AM

E-mail and surfing? It doesn't really matter. Any CPU from the past 5 years can handle it.
Score
0
a c 186 à CPUs
a b å Intel
a b À AMD
September 11, 2012 7:16:10 AM

^+1
P4 would be fine.
Score
0
September 11, 2012 7:34:26 AM

Even a raspberry pi can do that.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2012 8:34:28 AM

Even a docked phone can do that!

But to be honest - any modern day cpu starting from the Core 2 Duo from 2006 will be good enough.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2012 8:48:43 AM

Another vote for either. Save money on CPU and get more RAM or an SSD.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2012 10:13:25 AM

I think the OP honestly means casual usage which would imply more than just those two purposes.
Score
0
a c 487 à CPUs
a c 121 å Intel
a c 123 À AMD
September 12, 2012 1:01:28 AM

sarinaide said:
I think the OP honestly means casual usage which would imply more than just those two purposes.


Still doesn't matter any CPU from the past 5 years (or more) is enough for casual usage. Therefore, whichever is cheaper. AMD or Intel.
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 1:31:02 AM

Definitely the I3. For just everyday use the I3 is faster and has a lot more "power" than the AMD APU's. You want the fastest and best performance and don't care about graphics go with the I3.
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 2:08:38 AM

sarinaide said:
Is everything on Toms just going to be "intel" by default. What the Llano's offer is feature rich hardware with practicality across all spectrums of computer usage. The I3 is a fast efficient processor and nothing more, if surfing and word processing or some streaming is needed then save cash and get one of them fuddy duddy Pentium G chips, they are not that dissimilar to a i3 at a cheaper cost.

On the other hand you get the Llano, if you wait you will get a Trinity and honestly for the features and for budget and casual users it is a far better balance than any Intel low cost option.

http://www.miningweekly.com/article/sasol-looks-to-buil...


:pfff:  :pfff:  When everything from the so called competition sucks nuts and doesn’t offer any real competition than yes. I would take the so called fuddy duddy Pentium over the AMD crappy Athlon II equivalent. Also maybe you haven’t noticed but the Pentium beats out the Llano APU’s in sheer CPU power. There is no point in getting an APU when a Pentium will out perform the Llano. For everyday use there is no need for the slightly better integrated graphics of the APU. You would be better off with the stronger CPU power of the Pentium or I3 over the weaker APU with slightly better graphics. For gaming there is no point in going with AMD. Gamers aren’t going to use dedicated graphics and again there is no point in getting a crappy Athlon II equivalent when the Pentium, I3 and I5 will run circles around both AMD’s APU’s and Bulldozer.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2012 2:16:43 AM

Someone has been sucking on the blue coolaid. Missed the recent article did ya? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-llano-opencl,32...

To the op, if your doing anything graphic wise, get the a8, its better gpu than the a6. But as pointed out, if you wait, the a10 should be coming soon.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 2:28:20 AM

noob2222 said:
Someone has been sucking on the blue coolaid. Missed the recent article did ya? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-llano-opencl,32...

To the op, if your doing anything graphic wise, get the a8, its better gpu than the a6. But as pointed out, if you wait, the a10 should be coming soon.



albeit im usually for competition of parts, that review was essentially comparing a quad APU to a pentium g. depending on what side of the desktop/laptop question is, theres a moderately big difference between an i3(which is higher than the pentium g) and the A6(which is lower than the A8 in the test which is a full core loss)
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 2:31:58 AM

dudewitbow said:
albeit im usually for competition of parts, that review was essentially comparing a quad APU to a pentium g. depending on what side of the desktop/laptop question is, theres a moderately big difference between an i3(which is higher than the pentium g) and the A6(which is lower than the A8 in the test which is a full core loss)


Exactly so that so called review is garbage. How about comparing that APU to it's equal the I3 which will beat it. Nice try though noob. :non: 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2012 2:37:56 AM

*sigh* If all he is going to be doing is surfing the net, the cheaper one is that better option regardless of performance. If you are willing to spend a bit more for the hell of it get the i3, but the biggest difference in terms of surfing the web is the cost.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 2:59:30 AM

If you are just doing with "casual" daily tasks, I would say either. Although, the i3 has some pretty good upgrade paths. I don't think that would really matter though since you aren't doing much. I would like to suggest a 60GB SSD though. You can install your Windows on it and have a REALLY fast startup. Even the average user can't deny that bootup in 15 seconds is pretty sweet! :lol:  Thats my 2 cents. Hope you enjoyed.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 3:01:07 AM

I agree if cost was that far off, than the apu would be better off as a cost to performance ratio, but the question at the essential point was never cost until the OP states so. The title of the thread is "which is better". Im making a heavy conclusion that the questioned builds cost about the same, as no specific example was given.
Score
0
September 12, 2012 3:03:17 AM

dudewitbow said:
I agree if cost was that far off, than the apu would be better off as a cost to performance ratio, but the question at the essential point was never cost until the OP states so. The title of the thread is "which is better". Im making a heavy conclusion that the questioned builds cost about the same, as no specific example was given.


Well put. +1
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2012 3:14:11 AM

dudewitbow said:
I agree if cost was that far off, than the apu would be better off as a cost to performance ratio, but the question at the essential point was never cost until the OP states so. The title of the thread is "which is better". Im making a heavy conclusion that the questioned builds cost about the same, as no specific example was given.


Basically, OP needs to give more information.

First "Which is better" depends on how you define better. What's more, there are Llano A6 and Trinity A6 and Sandy Bridge i3 and Ivy Bridge i3.

You're comparing a $50-$75 a6 to a $120-$150 i3. Of course the i3 is going to perform better in terms of pure CPU performance, but with the money you save on an A6 you could build a much smoother system with an SSD.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2012 6:36:08 AM

rds1220 said:
:pfff:  :pfff:  When everything from the so called competition sucks nuts and doesn’t offer any real competition than yes. I would take the so called fuddy duddy Pentium over the AMD crappy Athlon II equivalent. Also maybe you haven’t noticed but the Pentium beats out the Llano APU’s in sheer CPU power. There is no point in getting an APU when a Pentium will out perform the Llano. For everyday use there is no need for the slightly better integrated graphics of the APU. You would be better off with the stronger CPU power of the Pentium or I3 over the weaker APU with slightly better graphics. For gaming there is no point in going with AMD. Gamers aren’t going to use dedicated graphics and again there is no point in getting a crappy Athlon II equivalent when the Pentium, I3 and I5 will run circles around both AMD’s APU’s and Bulldozer.


There is more practicality to a APU than you seem to give it credit for or understand. But you can happily read the latest articles which will shed some light on just how practical they are. That said Llano is soon to be replaced by Trinity which is significantly faster on the CPU and GPU part, factor in OpenCL support and a few other codes it is the perfect HTPC at a rather low cost.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2012 9:41:53 AM

rds1220 said:
Exactly so that so called review is garbage. How about comparing that APU to it's equal the I3 which will beat it. Nice try though noob. :non: 

why don't you read what you wrote

Quote:
When everything from the so called competition sucks nuts and doesn’t offer any real competition than yes. I would take the so called fuddy duddy Pentium over the AMD crappy Athlon II equivalent. Also maybe you haven’t noticed but the Pentium beats out the Llano APU’s in sheer CPU power. There is no point in getting an APU when a Pentium will out perform the Llano.


oh, you meant the I3, not the pentium ... you forgot to change your story tho. :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 10:45:11 PM

noob2222 said:
why don't you read what you wrote

Quote:
When everything from the so called competition sucks nuts and doesn’t offer any real competition than yes. I would take the so called fuddy duddy Pentium over the AMD crappy Athlon II equivalent. Also maybe you haven’t noticed but the Pentium beats out the Llano APU’s in sheer CPU power. There is no point in getting an APU when a Pentium will out perform the Llano.


oh, you meant the I3, not the pentium ... you forgot to change your story tho. :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 


Pff AMD fanboys...noob truly is a noob. In each price range Intel offers better performance over AMD's APU's or Bulldozer. AMD offers nothing more over Intel except slighty better integrated graphics. While that sounds great its still integrated graphics and it still sucks compared to a dedicated graphics card.
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 12, 2012 11:08:38 PM

sarinaide said:
There is more practicality to a APU than you seem to give it credit for or understand. But you can happily read the latest articles which will shed some light on just how practical they are. That said Llano is soon to be replaced by Trinity which is significantly faster on the CPU and GPU part, factor in OpenCL support and a few other codes it is the perfect HTPC at a rather low cost.


Cool story to bad is so flawed. APUs are a waste of money. Sure they have better graphics but for the everyday user it doesn't matter. For the everyday user Intel's HD graphics are fine. I would rather give my customers who are everyday users better performance and lesser graphics over a crappy Athlon II equivalent with better graphics that they don't even need. That voids that argument. Now your going go tell me abouts gamers. As a gamer I would rather have sheer performance and a dedicated graphics card than again a crappy Athlon II with onboard graphics which while better than Intel it still sucks at gaming. Like I said AMD offers nothing over Intel. In pretty much each price bracket Intel has better CPU performance. Yea Trinity is better than Llano but when the new APU'S (Trinity) vs Intel's new CPU's (IB) Intel still has better CPU perfomamce. You can keep buying crappy Athlon II equivalents but I'll take and have chosen to take the stronger CPU performance of the so called fuddy duddy Pentium G's and I3 over Llano and Trinity APU's.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 7:29:15 AM

Well Windows 8 with OpenCL support and in general more OpenCL support which will facilitate the GPU part assisting in FPU calculations and rendering, this is particularly beneficial in production applications and streaming things deemed useful to a casual user, so yes the IGPU part is very prevelant.

Consider trinity is the final rework of APU before steamroller which will be the first pure hybrid hetrogeneous processor with complex x86 and graphics core, add that the move is toward multilevel compute and cloud computing this is truely a fantastic technology, if you cannot appreciate it then perhaps you are posting in the wrong forums.

Would you stop calling people fanboys, it looks rather contridictory after reading one of your posts.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 9:27:19 AM

rds, your funny. op hasn't even said really what the computer is going to be for, and you assume he will need no graphics other than e-mail that he is currently using his laptop for. Maybe its a small-form factor and won't have a dedicated gpu, maybe he wants to watch some 1080P youtube videos without stuttering, or possibly play a couple of low end games. Thing is the OP hasn't even been back to say anything. can you say flame bait.
Score
0
Anonymous
September 13, 2012 10:05:19 AM

i would go pentium or i3, the reason being that for every motherboard price range, socket 1155 mobos bring more to the table than the equivalent FM1 socket and support SLI. plus with socket 1155 you can upgrade to i5 or i7 in the future. FM1 is dead, no one will make or support FM1 as soon as FM2 comes out with trinity. FM1 does not support pci-e 3.0, does not support sli, gets even more limited when you consider form factors and future upgrades. its a dead platform on motherboard basis

this is from a pure motherboard stand point
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 10:50:56 AM

I would wait for a A10, FM2 with Lucid MVP and OpenCL support, best casual-slash-HTPC-slash-basic gaming rig you can get.
Score
0
Anonymous
September 13, 2012 11:12:58 AM

go 1155 you wont be disappointed or wait for FM2. personally i have an i5-2500k and i find that i NEVER need more power than it has to offer, i can run a million things at once and it doesnt slow down a bit, i have never used the integrated graphics because i have a dedicated card. that being said, i assume that i3 would be the same way if you dont do intense CPU stressing things like video editting. i cannot comment on AMD performance
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 12:19:16 PM

I say get a celeron g*** as you can then in say 3 years get a i7 or i5 and put into that socket at a real cheap price.
Score
0
a c 145 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 1:56:20 PM

If I needed something for browsing/mail/tweet/etc. only, I would simply get a bluetooth or micro-USB keyboard for my N7.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 2:11:38 PM

spat55 said:
I say get a celeron g*** as you can then in say 3 years get a i7 or i5 and put into that socket at a real cheap price.


Thats not going to work out, Sandybridge is already EOL simply put they don't make Sandy's anymore so what stock is left once it goes thats it, Ivybridge will be EOL when Haswell comes out, and anyways it will be a new socket. There is no three year plan.
Score
0
a c 145 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 3:23:11 PM

sarinaide said:
Thats not going to work out, Sandybridge is already EOL simply put they don't make Sandy's anymore so what stock is left once it goes thats it

While Intel is progressively culling the Sandy Bridge SKU list, the remaining SKUs are still in production and expected to account for around 50% of Intel's shipments in September. More SKUs will likely get axed from production over the next couple of weeks as demand continues to shift toward Ivy Bridge.

Also, large IC manufacturers often have long-term supply contracts with some customers for specific parts/SKUs and simply cannot stop production overnight just because a new model came out. Intel will likely have at least one production line still baking Sandy Bridge wafers for these customers well into 2013.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 13, 2012 3:30:23 PM

InvalidError said:
While Intel is progressively culling the Sandy Bridge SKU list, the remaining SKUs are still in production and expected to account for around 50% of Intel's shipments in September. More SKUs will likely get axed from production over the next couple of weeks as demand continues to shift toward Ivy Bridge.

Also, large IC manufacturers often have long-term supply contracts with some customers for specific parts/SKUs and simply cannot stop production overnight just because a new model came out. Intel will likely have at least one production line still baking Sandy Bridge wafers for these customers well into 2013.


Minimum stocks but they are not actively going to manufacture Sandybridge, the shipments were existing stock. In the same way I can still get brand new 1100T's at will but they are very limited stock now.
Score
0
a c 154 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 13, 2012 4:04:12 PM

noob2222 said:
rds, your funny. op hasn't even said really what the computer is going to be for, and you assume he will need no graphics other than e-mail that he is currently using his laptop for. Maybe its a small-form factor and won't have a dedicated gpu, maybe he wants to watch some 1080P youtube videos without stuttering, or possibly play a couple of low end games. Thing is the OP hasn't even been back to say anything. can you say flame bait.


It doesn't really matter because no matter how you try to twist and turn it Intel is the better buy. You can get a crappy quad core APU for 109 dollars or for 10 dollars more get an I3 that will run circles around it. Like I said you can keep buying crappy Athlon II's but I'm sticking with Intel until AMD actually has something half decent to offer.
Score
0
a c 145 à CPUs
September 13, 2012 4:16:38 PM

sarinaide said:
Minimum stocks but they are not actively going to manufacture Sandybridge, the shipments were existing stock. In the same way I can still get brand new 1100T's at will but they are very limited stock now.

Intel is still shipping millions of Sandy Bridge SKUs each month, will be taking orders for Sandy Bridge SKUs at least into December and will be shipping them at least into June 2013. This is way too many CPUs to run off inventory alone, nobody wants to sit on nearly a whole year worth of stock.
Score
0
a c 487 à CPUs
a c 121 å Intel
a c 123 À AMD
September 14, 2012 5:27:32 AM

Intel has only just started to phase out the production of Sandy Bridge CPU this month (well at least for the mobile version). There is no indication as to when the last Sandy Bridge CPU will be produced though.

http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-sandy-bridge-to-be-pha...

Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 5:46:00 AM

InvalidError said:
Intel is still shipping millions of Sandy Bridge SKUs each month, will be taking orders for Sandy Bridge SKUs at least into December and will be shipping them at least into June 2013. This is way too many CPUs to run off inventory alone, nobody wants to sit on nearly a whole year worth of stock.


Basically just milking the market, SB has no place simply put the 60 series chipsets are now very limited and a SB on a 70 series chipset is a waste of money, why buy a board with features you cannot use.
Score
0
a c 283 à CPUs
a b å Intel
a b À AMD
September 14, 2012 5:55:11 AM

sarinaide said:
Basically just milking the market, SB has no place simply put the 60 series chipsets are now very limited and a SB on a 70 series chipset is a waste of money, why buy a board with features you cannot use.


When the only major thing that Ivy really brings to the table is PCIe 3.0, Sandy definitely still has a place.

And how are the 6 series chipsets limited? There's nothing a 7 series board does that a 6 series board can't. Yes, 7 series chipsets add native USB 3.0 and you have to do a BIOS flash to use an Ivy CPU in a 6 series board, but that's about it. Nothing significant.

Edit: Unless you mean limited, as in less of them available.

Score
0
September 14, 2012 6:15:18 AM

What is all this rubbish after crappy Athlon cores? Yes the APU's are a bit crap on the CPU side but you still have four real cores and a better graphics core. Yes the i3's cores are better, but four athlon cores are more than enough for a basic office box. Put either one with a 128GB Samsung 830 SSD and you'll be most satisified.

I won't even go into A75 chipsets which smash Intel's offerings - 6 SATA_6 ports, internal USB3 headers, E-SATA extra controllers on a lot of models etc etc.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 10:08:49 AM

DJDeCiBeL said:
When the only major thing that Ivy really brings to the table is PCIe 3.0, Sandy definitely still has a place.

And how are the 6 series chipsets limited? There's nothing a 7 series board does that a 6 series board can't. Yes, 7 series chipsets add native USB 3.0 and you have to do a BIOS flash to use an Ivy CPU in a 6 series board, but that's about it. Nothing significant.

Edit: Unless you mean limited, as in less of them available.


PCIe 3.0, Lucid MVP, Faster Memory bandwidth, More Sata, generally better VRM's, better bandwidth period. If the 70 series offered nothing then it wouldn't have been released.

Smeg45 said:
What is all this rubbish after crappy Athlon cores? Yes the APU's are a bit crap on the CPU side but you still have four real cores and a better graphics core. Yes the i3's cores are better, but four athlon cores are more than enough for a basic office box. Put either one with a 128GB Samsung 830 SSD and you'll be most satisified.

I won't even go into A75 chipsets which smash Intel's offerings - 6 SATA_6 ports, internal USB3 headers, E-SATA extra controllers on a lot of models etc etc.


Unless I missed something Llano is based on BD architecture just two modules and less power than say the 4100, yes the performance is around Athlon II x4 640 level which is not totally bad, but it is not a Athlon II core.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 10:22:50 AM

Llano is stars core aka athlon, Trinity is the first BD(PD actually) architecture apu.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 11:02:10 AM

I am aware of the Trinity APU's coming with a second varient with no iGPU namely Athlon II's using PD implementations. Suffice to say its Athlon II performance.
Score
0
September 14, 2012 12:49:37 PM

Whichever is faster in WinRAR lol.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 14, 2012 6:16:20 PM

sarinaide said:
I am aware of the Trinity APU's coming with a second varient with no iGPU namely Athlon II's using PD implementations. Suffice to say its Athlon II performance.

you said llano is based on bd, its not, its phenom.
Score
0
!