Hardware AMD vs. Intel

AMD vs. Intel


  • Total voters
    73

Tom Bombadildo

Dick, With Balls
Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
14,572
Trophies
2
Age
29
Location
I forgot
Website
POCKET.LIKEITS
XP
19,170
Country
United States
WhyNotBoth.gif

Showing hardcore brand loyalty is just silly, results in nothing but pointless bickering that means nothing.

For me, just depends on what I'm doing, really. Multithreaded tasks I'd choose AMD, especially since Ryzen, as they have more cores and threads and generally perform well across each thread, especially so if you're on a tight budget. Single threaded tasks, I'd go for Intel for sure, especially if I had a ton of cash to burn.

I tend to stick to Intel for my gaming PC, and AMD for my laptops. While games are becoming more dependent on multiple threads, it's still not to a point where having any more than 4 threads is any benefit whatsoever, so having those extra threads I might get with Ryzen is just useless for me (since really all I do is game on this desktop). My laptop, on the other hand, has a Ryzen 2500u, and is great for general work use and multitasking and such which is pretty much exactly what it's used for. Plus, since it's an APU, it's got halfway decent integrated graphics so I can occasionally game on it, too.
 

CORE

3:16
Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
1,176
Trophies
1
XP
2,064
Country
United Kingdom
Intel are overpriced a bit better than AMD not twice or three times better but they are priced like they are.
 

Owenge

GbaTemp browser
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
836
Trophies
1
Age
23
Location
◤__◥
XP
2,181
Country
United States
WhyNotBoth.gif

Showing hardcore brand loyalty is just silly, results in nothing but pointless bickering that means nothing.

For me, just depends on what I'm doing, really. Multithreaded tasks I'd choose AMD, especially since Ryzen, as they have more cores and threads and generally perform well across each thread, especially so if you're on a tight budget. Single threaded tasks, I'd go for Intel for sure, especially if I had a ton of cash to burn.

I tend to stick to Intel for my gaming PC, and AMD for my laptops. While games are becoming more dependent on multiple threads, it's still not to a point where having any more than 4 threads is any benefit whatsoever, so having those extra threads I might get with Ryzen is just useless for me (since really all I do is game on this desktop). My laptop, on the other hand, has a Ryzen 2500u, and is great for general work use and multitasking and such which is pretty much exactly what it's used for. Plus, since it's an APU, it's got halfway decent integrated graphics so I can occasionally game on it, too.
Agreed, intel is the better for game performance. But AMD (Ryzen) does have multitasking and gaming down pat, and it gets better with every update :P
 

Kingy

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2016
Messages
959
Trophies
1
Location
England I guess
XP
3,746
Country
United Kingdom
I prefer AMD due to the much better value and AM4, so I can upgrade without buying a new motherboard if I want Zen 2. And Ryzen still does a good job at gaming and single-threaded programs (the 2600(X) is amazing).
 
Last edited by Kingy,
  • Like
Reactions: Owenge

ThoD

GBATemp Addict (apparently), but more like "bored"
Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2017
Messages
3,631
Trophies
1
Age
27
XP
3,049
Country
Greece
AMD for almost the last 3 gens has been either a bit above or very slightly below the Intel equivalents at only a third of the price, reason I really only go for AMD and let's also not forget that they don't make a million different chipsets so that if you ever decide to upgrade the CPU you can just buy a new CPU, whereas for 99% of Intel's CPUs you will need an entirely new motherboard as well if you plan to get a significant upgrade... Also, AMD also has amazing GPUs that often can squeeze out extra performance if coupled with an AMD CPU, so that's a bonus too!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CORE and Owenge

RattletraPM

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
897
Trophies
1
XP
8,341
Country
Italy
As of now, AMD. Ryzen CPUs cost much less than Intel's counterparts while delivering better multithreaded performance in productivity tasks. The little performance difference in singlethreaded tasks isn't enough of a reason for me to pay a premium for a small FPS increase in games.
Plus, while I'm more than happy with my OC'd Ryzen 5 1600, having the opportunity to upgrade to a 3000 (or possibly 4000, as AMD said AM4 would be supported four years from the release) is really good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThoD and Owenge

Armadillo

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2003
Messages
4,262
Trophies
3
XP
5,201
Country
United Kingdom
I'm Intel at the moment, but if I was buying now, I'd go AMD. Intel has the ipc advantage, but the gap is no where near what is was with the fx line. If you have to have the highest single threaded ipc, then intel still has the crown, but for most people ryzen is fine.

After the z390 move, I'm not sure I'd want to give Intel money, locking out cpus for no reason is scummy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThoD and Owenge

Owenge

GbaTemp browser
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
836
Trophies
1
Age
23
Location
◤__◥
XP
2,181
Country
United States
I
I'm Intel at the moment, but if I was buying now, I'd go AMD. Intel has the ipc advantage, but the gap is no where near what is was with the fx line. If you have to have the highest single threaded ipc, then intel still has the crown, but for most people ryzen is fine.

After the z390 move, I'm not sure I'd want to give Intel money, locking out cpus for no reason is scummy.
got Ryzen, I got it for the price and multitasking. I considered Intel because I was building a gaming rig, but I went with AMD cuz a sell...
 

ThoD

GBATemp Addict (apparently), but more like "bored"
Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2017
Messages
3,631
Trophies
1
Age
27
XP
3,049
Country
Greece
I still have my fx8300 and ... It still work nice :)
I mainly use FX6350 and still does everything great, don't know why people say bad things about the FX series when the 9590 (my backup PC) actually was literally only 4% slower in games compared to the x3.6 times more expensive Intel counterpart:P
 

chocoboss

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2016
Messages
569
Trophies
0
Age
35
Location
FRANCE
XP
1,708
Country
France
@ThoD : They are not really great cpu the power consuption is really bad if I remember right but they can do the job really well

They can run actual game if you have a decent GPU :D

AMD + ATI <3 ...

Yeah I'm a fanboy x)
 
Last edited by chocoboss,
  • Like
Reactions: Owenge

ThoD

GBATemp Addict (apparently), but more like "bored"
Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2017
Messages
3,631
Trophies
1
Age
27
XP
3,049
Country
Greece
@ThoD : They are not really great cpu the power consuption is really bad if I remember right but they can do the job really well

They can run actual game if you have a decent GPU :D

AMD + ATI <3 ...

Yeah I'm a fanboy x)
The only real problem with the FX series was the high TDP (wattage) on SOME of the processors (basically anything that wasn't the last of it's thousand had too inefficient TDP, so 6350, 8350 and 9590 were the only efficient ones), which means higher temperatures and combined with the stock coolers being kinda loud because they had to run at extra high speeds to compensate would get annoying (too loud or too hot, no balance between the two)...

PS: I'm more for AMD CPU with AMD Sapphire Radeon GPU
 

spotanjo3

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
11,145
Trophies
3
XP
6,185
Country
United States
I always prefer Intel over AMD.. Why ? Gaming.

Just the same for AMD VS Nvidia. I also prefer Nvidia over AMD. Never liked AMD at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vpd

Armadillo

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2003
Messages
4,262
Trophies
3
XP
5,201
Country
United Kingdom
While people definitely go overboard with how bad it is, fx line gets shit on because Bulldozer was meh and while Piledriver did make some improvements, it wasn't really cheap enough.

FX8350 on launch was $199. By that time Ivy bridge was already out and an i5 3570k was $225. i5 3570k outperformed it in most tasks, while not consuming as much power and running cooler. Intel was more expensive, but the difference was generally not enough to nudge people to AMD.

Might not have been like this everywhere, but most of the English content online is US focused.

Only got worse as time goes on because AMD gave up on it, so fx line stagnated while intel pushed on with Haswell.
 
Last edited by Armadillo, , Reason: bulldozer and piledriver wrong way around and typos, whoops.
  • Like
Reactions: Kioku and ThoD

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    Sicklyboy @ Sicklyboy: *teleports behind you* "Nothing personnel, kiddo" +1