1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

CPU Intel vs AMD - A question or something to think about?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Nealieboyee, 1 Jan 2017.

  1. Nealieboyee

    Nealieboyee Packaging Master!

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    3,821
    Likes Received:
    456
    Hi All,
    A very happy New Year to all of you Bit-techers.

    I have a question that's been bugging me lately, moreso as I'm planning a move back to the UK in a couple of weeks and intend building a new rig.

    Backstory: I've been out of the higher end tech game for about 4 years now. I've been in southern Africa all that time and I've been dealing with lower end CPUs like core 2 duos (old!) and as high-end as an i5 2500. Yes, they really are living in the dark ages down there.

    When I left the UK, the best i5 chip was the 2500k. Everyone loved them and had them for gaming, some because they couldn't afford an i7 XXXX. AMD didn't have anything really substantial at the time, as far as I can remember.

    Yes Intel makes better chips, and yes they are more expensive, sometimes obscenely so. So here is my question: With AMD giving better pricing, albeit at a lower performance level, do you REALLY NEED TO BUY INTEL? I'm aiming this question at the everyday user, gamer, streamer, etc. I'm not directing this to server grade hardware or large businesses etc.

    The performance difference between AMD and Intel chips is there, but is the difference so great that you would really notice it during your everyday activities, and so great to warrant an extra GBP100 or whatever extra it may cost for the Intel model? E.g. buying an i5 6600K over an FX8350?

    Give me opinions!

    Thanks
    Betty
     
  2. Harlequin

    Harlequin Modder

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,131
    Likes Received:
    194
    The FX range is about to replaced by Ryzen - a chip designed by Jim Keller (he who made the S939 X2).

    early indications show it could well be amazing - AMD had a live launch event with games and applications; notably blender.



    you can even download the file they used from

    http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon

    and check against your own rig!

    At first glance it appears AMD are `back in the game`. No word on pricing yet , and a short while to wait.


    As for Intel - if you had a clocked i7 2600k , then disappointingly , only the very latest i7 will be an increase; but its not big.
     
  3. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,917
    Likes Received:
    724
    A low end Intel 2c/4t chip is a match for an high end AMD currently (Ryzen doesn't exit yet), as a platform the AMD stuff comes in cheaper and it is more than up to the task, I recently killed an i7 3770k and dropped a dual core Pentium in which has much less grunt than an AMD FX to see if the rest of my system was still functional, I used that for a while and found it was surprisingly competent for gaming, only thing I noticed was that I would get lower min frames in heavy scenes but surprisingly acceptable, I also compared it to my daughters machine which has an AMD APU, the A10 is not as good as an FX chip from AMD and that was even more capable with the same GPU than the dual core Pentium due to more threads.

    So basically yup AMD is fine, just make sure you get enough cores, 4 thread min, I had the odd game like Forza that would not play on the Dual core Pentium, probably due to its console based origins where they have 8 threads CPUs.
     
  4. Nealieboyee

    Nealieboyee Packaging Master!

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    3,821
    Likes Received:
    456
    I must agree they perform just fine. I have an A8 5600K running next to me without discrete GPU and I'm playing Rocket league and other games just fine.
    One of the reasons I favour AMD recently is overclocking. I left Intel after they pulled the ability to overclock the cheaper chips and locked them down. To me that wasn't fair and they basically forced you to either buy an expensive chip or go to AMD. I went to the amd x4 750K and OC'd it to 4.5GHz. Now with it OC'd it was about comparable to an i3, but for less than half the price, with more clock speed, overclockable, and a true quad core.

    The question still nags me though. If the BEST AMD CPU was enough to do everything you can throw at it, would you still buy an i7? What would your incentive be for spending more money on the i7? Perhaps just wanting the best of the best?
     
  5. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    523
    Clock speed isn't everything. It's just a number...

    As you are moving back, I would highly suggest waiting for Ryzen to launch so that we can all get proper reviews of it. It should be very similar to a high end Intel 8 core, but it won't be as fast. Fast enough is what it will be, though.

    AMD are still heavily tweaking Ryzen to make it as good as it can be on launch. I don't think they're done yet. ;)
     
  6. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    4,917
    Likes Received:
    724
    I tend to buy the best i afford at the time and try not too compromise as i know it will last longer, I have 4k screens and VR so barrier for gaming is high.
     
  7. Anfield

    Anfield Multimodder

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    7,059
    Likes Received:
    970
    Depends on your definition of everyday activities.

    For the average 9-5 office drone even the Atom Z8300 is already overkill (and thats a chip you find in dirt cheap no name tablets as it doesn't even come close to counting as a desktop product).
    On the other hand if you try to encode a large video even a £5000 Xeon will quickly feel inadequate.
    Not even to mention the near infinite usage scenarios in between.
     
  8. RedFlames

    RedFlames ...is not a Belgian football team

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    15,401
    Likes Received:
    2,996
    Maybe not, but as Anfield alludes to the AMD offerings aren't enough for everything I personally need from a CPU/Mobo package.
     
  9. Vault-Tec

    Vault-Tec Green Plastic Watering Can

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2015
    Posts:
    14,883
    Likes Received:
    3,667
    One thing I had a lot of respect for was how AMD continued binning and improving Vishera. I mean yeah it was based on a turd but they proved you can polish a turd.

    You can still buy AM3+ boards and CPUs. If they were not selling people like Asus would not be making them, yet a few of the big companies have actually released new boards lately. I think it's Intel's pricing and locking down chips that has kept AMD making at least something.

    However, with Zen? dear god. Let's say they get another 15%. That would be nuts.
     
  10. Nealieboyee

    Nealieboyee Packaging Master!

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    3,821
    Likes Received:
    456
    Wow some great replies here. This thread wasn't really about advice for a new build. I wanted to see people's opinions on the matter.

    That's a good reason to buy Intel then. By "last longer", I assume you mean you won't have to upgrade too often. Not "longer" meaning it will break in 2 years.

    This is true. I've done 5 or 6 AM1 builds for budget office desktops, and with a 60GB SSD they fly. Plenty of power for day to day use. Using an i3/5/7 there would be a waste of money.
    With a xeon feeling inadequate, I guess it boils down to our need to have things NOW. A lower end chip might encode that video in a few hours but the xeon might get the job done in 30 minutes, but its never fast enough is it?

    What kind of stuff dost thou do that taxes thy chip so?

    Oh absolutely. There is no denying Intel lost out on a big part of the market (in our eyes) when they started locking chips for profit. Do you think Zen or Ryzen will really be a good competitor for Intel's offerings?
     
  11. bawjaws

    bawjaws Multimodder

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    4,268
    Likes Received:
    875
    Zen looks promising, but there are so many unknowns surrounding it just now that it's far too early to say how good it'll be. I think people are leaping to conclusions based on very limited information, which is a dangerous game. I hope Zen is successful, but we don't know what range of products are going to be launched, their performance, price, release date or availability.
     
  12. faugusztin

    faugusztin I *am* the guy with two left hands

    Joined:
    11 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    6,953
    Likes Received:
    270
    If we exclude Zen, and if we ignore the IGP part, then sadly AMD is absolutely noncompetitive - the prices are in similar regions as their Intel counterpart, when it comes to performance. The only advantage for AMD is the IGP, when it comes to a builds with no dedicated graphics card.

    For example A10-7890K (top AMD APU) vs similarly priced Skylake i3-6300 (middle price point Intel i3) :
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1782?vs=1683
    Result: Intel wins on CPU performance alone. And that was i3.

    FX-9590 (the top, 220W AM3+ CPU) beats the i3 sometimes:
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1289?vs=1683
    But only rarely beats an i5-6600 (not even the K model) :
    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1289?vs=1646

    In my eyes, anything pre-Ryzen from AMD is pointless (with the exception i mentioned above), as you usually get worse CPU performance than a identically priced Intel CPU. That is the sad truth.
     
  13. rollo

    rollo Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,887
    Likes Received:
    131
    Agree with faug, yes the AMD chips Overclock but the extra you spend on mobo and cooler to hit big clocks can easily outweigh the cost of moving to the next I5 chip which will be faster at stock in every scenario.

    I would buy nothing AMD offers at this stage, ryzen could change that but I am not in the market for a cpu at this point.

    My aim is for a cpu to last 5 years.
     
  14. Vault-Tec

    Vault-Tec Green Plastic Watering Can

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2015
    Posts:
    14,883
    Likes Received:
    3,667
    If you assume that the CPU is only getting a light load over two cores. When the AMDs thread they will leave any I3 or I5 in the dust.

    With the way things are going I think AMD and Intel are both assuming that threaded loads will become more commonplace, because if Ryzen is as good as we are being led to believe then I think Intel will fight back the only way they can - more cores.

    As for the rest of AMD's range? I think you will see that phased out now. Given the time they have had to refine etc it would probably work out cheaper just to make Ryzen CPUs with pretty much every stage of the market taken care of (2c, 4c, etc etc). It seems they have massively cored Zen chips coming too, so will likely fight back in the server market. I hope so, some of their Opterons were fantastic value for money and overclocked like stink too.
     
  15. Anfield

    Anfield Multimodder

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    7,059
    Likes Received:
    970
    One would think so, but they launched an AM4 OEM only version of their ancient APUs not too long ago:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/10705...e-and-am4-analysis-a12-9800-b350-a320-chipset

    So might be a long time until we see dirt cheap low clock quad core Ryzen:eyebrow:
     
  16. rollo

    rollo Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,887
    Likes Received:
    131
    AMD have been assuming applications would get more threaded for the last 5 years just about, the reality has always been very different. A high % of buyers for high end cpus just use them in games where the list of games to support past 4 threads is very limited.

    Console ports may start using more threads but think we will see them push more memory and Vram is truth. 8gb memory and 8gb vram could become minimums for ports.

    Video and music editing can all use more threads.

    Think price will be ryzen biggest issue, it will undercut Intel but not by as much as AMD fans think it should be, realistically the best chip will be close to £800 with our current rate of exchange. With the lower end chips going down accordingly. Will AMD have a £200 6600k beater not sure. As £200 is surely the limits for a lot of people anyway.

    Saw some post the other day this person expects the top end chip to price match the 7700k so £350 lol, let's be honest it's not going to happen. AMD would bankrupt themselves By doing it.
     
  17. Anfield

    Anfield Multimodder

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    7,059
    Likes Received:
    970
    If they want to achieve anything resembling marketshare they don't have a choice but to utterly destroy the value proposition of the 6600k and below.

    According to the steam survey 1 - 4 core cpus have a combined marketshare of 98.14% and only 4.08% of the Intel cpus are 3.7Ghz or above,

    http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
     
  18. Harlequin

    Harlequin Modder

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,131
    Likes Received:
    194
  19. RedFlames

    RedFlames ...is not a Belgian football team

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    15,401
    Likes Received:
    2,996
    3D modelling/rendering primarily. With the odd bit of tinkering in UE4 and Unity. My preference for the Mental Ray renderer also skews my GPU choices in nVidia's direction.

    CPU performance wasn't the only deciding factor in Intel's favour - NVMe SSD support and better USB 3.x support [more ports] tipped things in Intel's favour.

    That said, Intel's hobbling of their cheaper cpu/chipset offerings is still annoying.
     
  20. Harlequin

    Harlequin Modder

    Joined:
    4 Jun 2004
    Posts:
    7,131
    Likes Received:
    194
    the most annoying part was the cancellation of the 1090 and 1070 chipset ; apparently AMD had it ready then binned it!
     

Share This Page