Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD or Intel? Please explain.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 25, 2013 4:00:51 AM

I posted about my motherboard on the other forum, but Id like to take my CPU question over here to debate it a little more.

Basically, from what im reading, Intel seems to be the better brand when it comes to CPU.

But, the prices don't make sense to me, so I would love to have some help clearing this up.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... 179.99

That processor, for 179.99, seems great. But its a quad-core at 3.1 Ghz.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... 169.99

AMD on the other hand is 10 dollars cheaper, with an 8 CORE, of 3.6Ghz.....

I dont see how the i5 would be better...

More about : amd intel explain

February 25, 2013 4:04:39 AM

clock speeds and core count do not mean anything. The architecture of the CPU itself means more nowadays. The Intel CPU's perform much better per core while the AMD has more cores, but each core performs less. That AMD CPU is outdated as the bulldozer architecture got replaced by the piledriver architecture.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:05:24 AM

So the 8 core, 3.6Ghz will perform less than a 4 core 3.1Ghz by intel?
m
0
l
Related resources
February 25, 2013 4:08:24 AM

aero412 said:
So the 8 core, 3.6Ghz will perform less than a 4 core 3.1Ghz by intel?


The CPU you mentioned is outdated, compare the i5 to an FX 8350/8320. Depending on what you CPU you pick, they trade blows. The i5 generally performs better in gaming, while the 8350 performs better in video editing.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:12:58 AM

I couldn't imagine a 8-core with a higher Ghz losing to a 4 core with a lower Ghz, but it seems Intel is just that much better for gaming.

Thanks a ton for your help.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:13:03 AM

To expand on plasmaj12345's explanation, you cant compare cores and clock speeds of CPUs with entirely different architectures. Very generally speaking, Intel has larger and more complex cores that can execute slightly more instructions per clock cycle, that is, Intel is more efficient at processing information for every clock cycle. Why this is the case is rather complex, but you can search the internet for tons of articles on the topic. AMD, with their inferior cores, attempts to level the playing field by adding more cores to their chips and pushing the clock speed up. Overall though, when you compare Intel's offering vs AMD's, you will see that in the end, Intel is generally a better processor in terms of performance.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:17:32 AM

aero412 said:
I posted about my motherboard on the other forum, but Id like to take my CPU question over here to debate it a little more.

Basically, from what im reading, Intel seems to be the better brand when it comes to CPU.

But, the prices don't make sense to me, so I would love to have some help clearing this up.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... 179.99

That processor, for 179.99, seems great. But its a quad-core at 3.1 Ghz.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... 169.99

AMD on the other hand is 10 dollars cheaper, with an 8 CORE, of 3.6Ghz.....

I dont see how the i5 would be better...


Neither is better. It is all price/performance. Overall an i5-3570k is the best gaming processor. However my brother got an FX-8320 for $150, which is a crazy good deal. Get an FX-83xx for $150-$170, or get an i5-3570k. Those are your best options.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:20:49 AM

CaptainTom said:
Neither is better. It is all price/performance. Overall an i5-3570k is the best gaming processor. However my brother got an FX-8320 for $150, which is a crazy good deal. Get an FX-83xx for $150-$170, or get an i5-3570k. Those are your best options.


The FX series are really only good if the op plans to overclock, because at their price, the op can spend the price difference on a good CPU cooler. The i5's perform better at stock levels in gaming, but lose the ability to overclock (except i5 3570k).
m
0
l
a c 192 à CPUs
a b å Intel
February 25, 2013 4:26:58 AM

toss out the number of cores from your mind. what it comes down to now with cpu is how the cores themselves are designed. (core logic). amd cpu the newer core logic is getting faster and it getting away from the older x86 code. amd chips are getting faster in a few years if amd is still making cpu chips they may catch up to intel in raw power that the intel cpu design has. with newer amd chips microsoft and amd have to right newer code for there cpu..(core of the cpu not the same as intel x86 core).
took about 6-9 months for microsoft and amd to get the code bugs worked out of windows. when you look at real world tests both office and games...some amd chips are faster for video and photoshop then intel cpu. in games the i7 from intel there no real amd cpu yet that can go toe to toe with it. toms and few online review done reviews of the top amd vs intel cpu and high end gaming cards.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8350-core-i7-377...
when you take a review metric like this..(im an intel guy). toss out the vs mindset... what you have to look at is the cost of the cpus and there over all performance. when your doing a build and have $$ of funds.. you have to look at the cost to performance of your parts. right now if you look online the amd video cards have a better deal there cheaper then the nvidia cards and some of them are faster. even intel own cpu brand..the i5 3570k is the sweetspot for an intel gaming rig. it the right price/performace. if we were do a metric for low end gaming system then the amd fx chip would be number one. they have better gpu build into them then the intel g/i3 cpu. gamers and or fan boys they take game charts and say look we beet your best chip by x amount of frames..well yes they did but the chip that did that may be 300-1000. and the fps may have been 10 fps or less. when toms and other talk about gaming system there trying to show where the cpu and gpu and ram work or cause bottleneck..see this in there test beds they use and the setting they set there test beds up.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:34:11 AM

Nice explanation smorizio, thanks.

My situation is this,

1. I dont overclock
2. I have a 650w PSU with a Nvidia Geforce GTX 560 ti
3. I have 300$ to spend. (That needs to include a motherboard and DDR3 Ram)
If 30 dollars more, would mean twice as better, then yes i would spend it.
It seems to me everyone loves the i5-3570k. Its 30 dollars more, but if its worth it, tell me.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:37:39 AM

plasmaj12345 said:
The FX series are really only good if the op plans to overclock, because at their price, the op can spend the price difference on a good CPU cooler. The i5's perform better at stock levels in gaming, but lose the ability to overclock (except i5 3570k).


That's why I said get an i5-3570k. If you have the money it is silly to get anything less unless it is an FX-83xx for the price I listed. The locked i5's will probably be weaker once games utilize all 8 cores a ton (And they already are starting to use them).
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:40:07 AM

aero412 said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I see the GHz is better than the i5-3350 but,

When it says HD Graphics 4000, what exactly does that mean?

Intel HD Graphics is the graphics subsystem of the Intel processor. It means you don't have to have a separate graphics card in the system to display video. Unfortunately, it is not very powerful though. The number is essentially the rating. 4000 is better than 2500.

aero412 said:
Nice explanation smorizio, thanks.

3. I have 300$ to spend. (That needs to include a motherboard and DDR3 Ram)
If 30 dollars more, would mean twice as better, then yes i would spend it.
It seems to me everyone loves the i5-3570k. Its 30 dollars more, but if its worth it, tell me.

Does the $300 include the CPU? Because the i5 is around $230. You can't really get a good motherboard and RAM with that CPU for $300. Unless someone knows something I dont. :( 
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:42:48 AM

tigerg said:



Does the $300 include the CPU? Because the i5 is around $230. You can't really get a good motherboard and RAM with that CPU for $300. Unless someone knows something I dont. :( 


The 300$ does include the CPU, but what im saying is, if the i5-3570k is WORTH the extra money, i will spend it.

If the i5-3570k is much better than the i5-3350P, then i would rather spend the extra money instead of settling for less.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:45:57 AM

tigerg said:
Intel HD Graphics is the graphics subsystem of the Intel processor. It means you don't have to have a separate graphics card in the system to display video. Unfortunately, it is not very powerful though. The number is essentially the rating. 4000 is better than 2500.


Does the $300 include the CPU? Because the i5 is around $230. You can't really get a good motherboard and RAM with that CPU for $300. Unless someone knows something I dont. :( 


I have used this in a build before. It supports overclocking and PCIe 3.0. Best you will get on a budget.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:47:13 AM

Quote:
The 300$ does include the CPU, but what im saying is, if the i5-3570k is WORTH the extra money, i will spend it.

If the i5-3570k is much better than the i5-3350P, then i would rather spend the extra money instead of settling for less.


Yes the i5-3570k is worth the extra money easily.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:51:19 AM

Quote:
The 300$ does include the CPU, but what im saying is, if the i5-3570k is WORTH the extra money, i will spend it.

If the i5-3570k is much better than the i5-3350P, then i would rather spend the extra money instead of settling for less.

Do you plan to overclock? If so, you need the 3570k. Plus, you will need a more expensive motherboard and probably higher end RAM. It quickly goes over your $300 budget.

If you don't plan to overclock, don't get the 3570k and chose a lower end motherboard to stay within your budget.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 4:59:23 AM

I dont plan to overclock, but was still thinking the i5-3570k was worth it over the other, even without overclocking.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 6:36:39 AM

Nope, don't buy "K" if u not planing to overclock it....

try search for i5 without "K" it will perform same in stock clock and cheaper...

m
0
l
a c 192 à CPUs
a b å Intel
February 25, 2013 4:10:06 PM

if there a micro center near you they have combo deals on mb. myself i have a 3540 cpu. works fine dont have any issues with it in my sabertooth mb. in real world your not going to see any more frame rate from a 3.1g cpu or a 3.4g cpu. in bench testing the 3.4 will be a little higher.
m
0
l
February 25, 2013 7:18:20 PM

you can go for i5 3570 or 3570k i advise to go on the intel man!you pay a lot of money so not pleasant to just waste them!if you understand what i mean!
m
0
l
February 26, 2013 12:42:52 AM

aero412 said:
I dont plan to overclock, but was still thinking the i5-3570k was worth it over the other, even without overclocking.


You don't plan to overclock yet, but after a year or so, You may need extra speed, and for that You will need that "k" plus some guidelines here.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2013 3:33:49 AM

aero412 said:
I dont plan to overclock, but was still thinking the i5-3570k was worth it over the other, even without overclocking.


Why wouldn't you overclock? It is as easy as pushing a button! Even with the stock cooler you can get to 4.2 GHz with no increase in voltage.
m
0
l
!