(A) for routine computing - internet, MS office, DVD/BluRay playback, some light kids games - I am leaning towards Intel Pentium G620 Sandy Bridge. Will it be sufficient or should I go for i3 CPU. How good is the onboard video?
(B) for image processing and video authoring - not sure about this. Ivy Bridge Dual Core or Quad Core?
Is there less expensive AMD alternative to above mentioned Intel CPUs? Looking at the reviews, Intel CPUs seem to perform better than AMD and consume less power.
Image processing and video editing will be much quicker with a quad core. The A10 would be good for your needs, but if you can wait until the 24th, AMD will release their Piledriver CPU's. The FX-4350 looks promising and will cost $125.
(B) for image processing. the Ivy Bridge i5, i7's are the way to go with vid processing and what not..because video production/editing/etc, utilizes more cores, so, quad core and above is preferred.
As a conclusion, if you want to have a LESS EXPENSIVE (BUDGET) solution/alternative for your (A) and (B), i would recommend you the AMD A8-3870K http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a8-3870k-apu-overcl...
the article states that 'it's a quad core cpu with an onboard graphics that is capable of great feats.'
it is noted that Intel cpu performs better at single threaded application, but with the A6 being a quad core, it is a viable solution for your (B) question because the application uses multi threaded application. (more cores)
Get the A8, or a 965 BE and a cheap graphics card (A ddr3 6670 games fine on Skyrim with no AA, 4xAF @ 1280X1024, with a couple of graphic mods.).
Not much point in getting an i3 for what you want to do, unless you really wanted to pay more for a slight difference in single threaded applications and games, whilst having a crummier (very much so) graphics card.
So yeah. If your going for an i3, get a 965 (Or wait for piledriver) and a 6670.
Let me iterate on the intel situation.
The i5 2500k, the flagship intel product for price/performance costs £165.
The AMD Phenom II x4 965 BE costs £70-£80.
The i5 2500k is at least 2x more expensive than the 965, and is only 1.25x more powerful.
Thanks you guys. What I understand from this discussion
(a) For routine build - i3-3225 ($145) or AMD A10 ($130)
(b) for video editing - i5 ( about $200) or i7 OR AMD 965 BE ($99) (wait for piledriver launch on Oct 24, I read it will priced lower than i5). I can pair the CPU with GTX460 or Radeon 5670 (I already have these GPU).
for heavy tasking and pro work like adobe ps premiere i suggest amd is far better then intel amd is just like rough & tough with each thing gaming + pro work too i still using my fx 8150 is great one but when i i5 2500k in pc labs i dont get much speed that fx 8150 has given to me i suggest am3+ board with fx 4100 or get phenom x 4 series one too
Im just answering his question k? OP wanted a --cheaper alternatives--,so here it is...
for an AMD solution:
the A8 3870K/A10 5800K is cheap. With quad core and a good onboard graphics.. for both watching DVD/Bluray, light gaming...
for an alternative Intel solution:
an i3 3225 has better single thread power, so, paired it up with a single discrete graphics card (GTX 460, HD5670, which OP already has in his possesion)
so, as a conclusion, my 1st post here has quite a bit of a budget sound to it.
as i quote from OP's first post:
''(B) for image processing and video authoring - not sure about this. Ivy Bridge Dual Core or Quad Core?
Is there less expensive AMD alternative to above mentioned Intel CPUs? Looking at the reviews, Intel CPUs seem to perform better than AMD and consume less power''
he was asking whether an IB dual core or quad core is better...
so in conclusion,he is asking for a BUDGET (cpu solution that is $150 below) alternatives. Unless OP changes his/her mind to go with an i5, i7, then we can give him new insight.
But until then we cant make speculation, ''oh, i5's and i7's pls, dont go i3, etc''
so, i do admit 1 thing...
+1 to obsama1, i mistakenly said A6, but i was gonna say A8 3870K, so, ya, mistake there..
and +1 to obsama1 about Piledriver...
cant think of Piledriver beating Intel, but, as said, AMD is the budget solution for those who want a budget quad core, or etc... so ya, waiting for Piledriver is an option too...