Why is AMD so cheap compared to intel.

[ZeeD]

Hey all,

I've got a high end pc at the moment, i7-6800k as my cpu and I was looking at building another pc for video rendering whilst I game on my primary pc. I was looking at something cheap as it wont be my go to pc.

The last time I touch amd was like in 2015 had a laptop that had the same apu as the ps4 and that so slow, it was slower than my laptop that had an intel i3 2nd gen i think got it in 2012/3 and that ran so much faster.

So I wanted to get some opinions because there an 8 core amd processor that turbo boosts for 4.0 ghz for £130 (https://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-fx-8320-black-edition-vishera-8-core-am3plus-clock-35ghz-turbo-40ghz-8mb-l3-cache-125w-cpu-retai) why is that so cheap compared to an i7 6800k that cost me around £400 i think thats quad core.

thanks for anyone that replies.

 

[Gam3r01]

Because it is a vastly inferior processor.
Cores and GHz mean nothing compared to architecture, and intels is much better than AMDs.

 

[Sakkura]

Cores and GHz do matter, a lot.

But they're far from the whole story. There's another factor called IPC, which determines how much work each core gets done per clock cycle.

As it happens, right now Intel CPUs have far higher IPC than AMD CPUs, so while the clocks look similar and AMD gives you more cores for the money, the Intel CPUs actually have a major performance advantage.

AMD will launch new CPUs with better IPC early next year.

 

[Gam3r01]

Thats why I said compared to, not in general.
If you dont have enough threads it would impact performance, and core speed only matters when comparing identical chips.

 

[sykozis]

You both seemed to miss the simple fact that the work load itself plays a huge part in how a CPU performs. In heavily threaded applications, IPC is typically less an issue than core count is, and those are the workloads that the FX series processors are designed for. They were not designed for lightly threaded work loads.

Part of the reason the FX-8320 is so much cheaper is the fact that it's a 4 year old processor. It was launched in Oct 2012.

 

[R4DIO4CT1VE]

poorer performing cpus, hopefully Zen will be good because i would rather not have an Intel monopoly.

 

[synphul]

In heavily threaded situations an i7 with only 4 cores will surpass an fx 8350 with 8 cores (modules). Ipc will always play a role so long as there's data to be processed. That said It seems odd to use the 6800k for gaming and looking for another machine like an amd (or lower tiered intel for that matter) to do video rendering. Whether an i5, i7 quad, amd etc the 6800k would be the best of the bunch for video editing with the additional cores.

The 6 cores might affect 1 or 2 games but the vast majority 6 cores vs 4 will provide no improvement. Especially when factoring in that quad cores like the 6600k or 6700k generally overclock easier and tend to achieve higher stable clocks which may prove beneficial depending on the game. Either that or wait for zen to drop and see what those prices are like along with performance, it should be a fair amount better than the current fx cpu's which have been in use the past 5yrs and are on the brink of being replaced. It makes sense to stick with something like an 8350 if already owning one but makes a relatively poor time to invest in one new.