Question Amd vs intel

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
Hi all

I need some advice. I’m thinking of changing over from amd to intel. I currently have a 2700x and rx570gpu and looking to upgrade.Should I wait for the 3rd Gen cpu’s or switch over?I’m looking at an i7 but I’m not sure which one to get as for the motherboard and Gpu aswell. I have no knowledge on Intel so it’s pretty difficult to look. I mostly Use my Pc for Gaming and productivity. But mostly Gaming. Any help would be really great thank you
 

Barty1884

Titan
Moderator
For gaming, the Intel edge would be measureable, but not going to be night & day.
From a productivity perspective, that really depends what you mean by 'productivity'. Is that fairly light, general use? Or content creation etc?
The additional core/thread count can certainly be beneficial.

Unless your sole focus was 1080p (maybe 1440p) gaming, I wouldn't bother with a switch to Intel.

3000 series Ryzen might be a worthwhile consideration but, with that hardware, I'd probably shoot for a GPU upgrade before anything else, honestly.
 
Reactions: TJ Hooker

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
For productivity it’s mostly general use,music,movies,web browsing etc. 1080p gaming isn’t ideal that’s why I want to change aswell. As I don’t have a 1080p monitor anymore. The thing with amd is you don’t have a Gpu variety. With Intel there’s so much to choose from as I can see.

I’ve read up good things about amd’s new 3000 series but everyone says gaming is better on intel which I can’t tell you is true as I don’t no.

But I will definitely take your advice. Will upgrading my Gpu be more beneficial than a cpu upgrade?i have an amd B450 aswell which I’m not sure will be compatible for the 3000 series
 
Reactions: Crosslhs82x2

Barty1884

Titan
Moderator
What do you mean you don't have GPU variety? A 2700X will pair with any GPU out there right now. At 1080p, some of those will be restricted a little, either by IPC of the Ryzen, or by the resolution/game.... but a 2700X is far from a "bad" chip.

What resolution monitor do you have? If you've moved up (1440p, 4K), then the difference between Intel & AMD would be all be eliminated - but a 570 isn't going to be a great time at those resolutions.
 

mitch074

Distinguished
For productivity it’s mostly general use,music,movies,web browsing etc. 1080p gaming isn’t ideal that’s why I want to change aswell. As I don’t have a 1080p monitor anymore. The thing with amd is you don’t have a Gpu variety. With Intel there’s so much to choose from as I can see.

I’ve read up good things about amd’s new 3000 series but everyone says gaming is better on intel which I can’t tell you is true as I don’t no.

But I will definitely take your advice. Will upgrading my Gpu be more beneficial than a cpu upgrade?i have an amd B450 aswell which I’m not sure will be compatible for the 3000 series
What GPU variety? Nvidia cards work as well on AMD as they do on Intel. As for the B450, it should be compatible with 3000 with a BIOS upgrade.
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
What I meant by Gpu variety is in the amd range.Upgrading from The Rx 570 you have the 580/590 and threadripper. With the range of nvidia There’s so much more. Yes 1440p,so the graphics isn’t ideal. I have been looking at nvidia graphics cards,which would be an ideal upgrade for 1440p/4K?would 1650/1660 be ideal and support it or would I have to move up?

@mitch074. That’s great so atleast it supports the 3000 series.
 

mitch074

Distinguished
What I meant by Gpu variety is in the amd range.Upgrading from The Rx 570 you have the 580/590 and threadripper. With the range of nvidia There’s so much more. Yes 1440p,so the graphics isn’t ideal. I have been looking at nvidia graphics cards,which would be an ideal upgrade for 1440p/4K?would 1650/1660 be ideal and support it or would I have to move up?
Or you can wait a couple days and look at the reviews for Navi: RX5xxx may just be competitive. Vega 56 isn't too bad @1440p either.
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
I guess its also personal preference too.What do you think about the geforce gtx 1660 Oc edition 6GB? The Base Clock: 1530 MHz- Boost Clock: 1830 MHz compared to the rx580 8GB which the Boost Clock: 1365 MHz (Gaming Mode)- Base Clock: 1340 MHz? i think the 1660 will be a good choice
 

mitch074

Distinguished
I guess its also personal preference too.What do you think about the geforce gtx 1660 Oc edition 6GB? The Base Clock: 1530 MHz- Boost Clock: 1830 MHz compared to the rx580 8GB which the Boost Clock: 1365 MHz (Gaming Mode)- Base Clock: 1340 MHz? i think the 1660 will be a good choice
You can't compare on frequency alone: more execution units at lower frequency can perform similarly. See the RX480 compared with the RX570.
 
You can't directly compare the clock rates of different models of graphics cards as a means of comparing performance, as there are far more things that affect graphics card performance than that. Different models of cards can have different core counts, different memory configurations and different architectures, making the clock speeds not particularly relevant, aside from possibly getting slightly more performance out of a "factory overclocked" card.

That being said, a 1660 should be around 15-20% faster than a RX 580 or GTX 1060 6GB on average, and around 30-35% faster than an RX 570 or GTX 1060 3GB. That's about the performance hit you would see when moving from 1080p to 1440p, so a GTX 1660 at 1440p should get roughly similar frame rates to what your RX 570 could push at 1080p. That's still not going to be ideal for maxing out graphics settings at 1440p in newer games, so it might be worth looking at faster graphics cards. Something like Nvidia's RTX 2060 or AMD's soon to be released Radeon RX 5700 would likely be good options for running games at 1440p with good frame rates with the graphics settings turned up, though they will cost around $100 more than a GTX 1660. They should offer nearly double the performance of an RX 570 when performance is limited by graphics performance though, which it should be most of the time in newer games running at 1440p.

As for your CPU, it's perfectly fine, and you're not likely to see any particularly notable performance improvement from going with something like an Intel i7 or Ryzen 3000-series processor at 1440p with graphics cards around this performance level. If you were gaming on a 144Hz 1080p screen, and wanted to maximize frame rates, the current i7's might get you around 10% higher frame rates on average, but at 1440p the graphics card will be what's typically limiting you, unless you have a very high-end card (like an RTX 2080 or 2080 Ti) that can push high frame rates at that resolution.
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
You can't compare on frequency alone: more execution units at lower frequency can perform similarly. See the RX480 compared with the RX570.
That’s true
Wow the benchmarks are insane for those 2. If you had to OC the 480 I’m sure the results will be minimal to the 580
 
At the moment, using only an RX570 for a GPU, it would be hard to imagine you could tell the difference, as the 2700X is certainly fully saturating your GPU to it's last possible frame capable of being produced....

If determined to swap CPUs, as Ryzen 3600 through 3900X are launching within the next 24 hours or so, I'd certainly recommend waiting to see these processors' performance, and, see if your mainboard is compatible...

(Do you have complaints regarding your existing 2700X-based rig?)
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
You can't directly compare the clock rates of different models of graphics cards as a means of comparing performance, as there are far more things that affect graphics card performance than that. Different models of cards can have different core counts, different memory configurations and different architectures, making the clock speeds not particularly relevant, aside from possibly getting slightly more performance out of a "factory overclocked" card.

That being said, a 1660 should be around 15-20% faster than a RX 580 or GTX 1060 6GB on average, and around 30-35% faster than an RX 570 or GTX 1060 3GB. That's about the performance hit you would see when moving from 1080p to 1440p, so a GTX 1660 at 1440p should get roughly similar frame rates to what your RX 570 could push at 1080p. That's still not going to be ideal for maxing out graphics settings at 1440p in newer games, so it might be worth looking at faster graphics cards. Something like Nvidia's RTX 2060 or AMD's soon to be released Radeon RX 5700 would likely be good options for running games at 1440p with good frame rates with the graphics settings turned up, though they will cost around $100 more than a GTX 1660. They should offer nearly double the performance of an RX 570 when performance is limited by graphics performance though, which it should be most of the time in newer games running at 1440p.

As for your CPU, it's perfectly fine, and you're not likely to see any particularly notable performance improvement from going with something like an Intel i7 or Ryzen 3000-series processor at 1440p with graphics cards around this performance level. If you were gaming on a 144Hz 1080p screen, and wanted to maximize frame rates, the current i7's might get you around 10% higher frame rates on average, but at 1440p the graphics card will be what's typically limiting you, unless you have a very high-end card (like an RTX 2080 or 2080 Ti) that can push high frame rates at that resolution.
Your are 100% correct I saw a review on YouTube with 3 1660 cards and they are all different. I couldn’t agree more with everything you’ve said. I did compare on 1440p and with the 1660 I would get 29%more power and on 1080p 39% so it’s a big difference on 1080p,with the high end cards it would benefit more. They did compare the rx590 aswell as the 2060 and the 1660/1660ti were impressive.

As for my . 2700x it is a really good cpu.by the looks of the specs compared to the 8700k it’s not worth changing as there’s a small percentage in difference. but as you said that’s not what is limiting me. The graphics cards are. Are all nvidia cards compatible with all amd motherboards?the rx2060/rx2080 are really pricy,they are nearly double the price of the 1660
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Herald
I haven't yet really seen a reason why you'd want to switch platforms. That's a lot of money for 0 gain.
Fps is set by the cpu, the gpu has to live upto that number according to resolution and detail settings. If the Ryzen is capable of 250fps and an i9 9900k capable of 300fps in the same game, that means exactly nothing to you other than a benchmark number. The highest refresh monitors are 165Hz so that's the absolute most you'll get onscreen. Not 250, not 300. Humans are physically incapable of registering the differences in frequency above @ 120Hz. Many ppl can't tell the difference above @ 100Hz.

So with all that said, the only upgrade that makes any sense is monitor and gpu, something worthy of being an upgrade, not an expensive sideways move.
 
An RX580 or 1660Ti would likely be a nice cost effective upgrade allowing both a nice jump in 1080P framerates , and a jump to max or near max quality in most games...

RX580 is available all day long at $175-$185 dollars on Anazon...; you can weigh the performance comparisons adding Vega56 ($300), 1660Ti ($270-$285), RX590 ($220), etc., to see which best suits your 'performance per dollar spent' budget /goals on your chosen games at your desired res/quality settings.
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
On my the systems Zotac gtx 1070 ti with my 2600x
Zotac Gtx 1060 6gb with fx 8350
Zotac gtx 960 4gb with fx 6300
No issuse's
At the moment, using only an RX570 for a GPU, it would be hard to imagine you could tell the difference, as the 2700X is certainly fully saturating your GPU to it's last possible frame capable of being produced....

If determined to swap CPUs, as Ryzen 3600 through 3900X are launching within the next 24 hours or so, I'd certainly recommend waiting to see these processors' performance, and, see if your mainboard is compatible...

(Do you have complaints regarding your existing 2700X-based rig?)
That’s true but if i changed my Gpu with my 2700x and also upgrade my cpu I might not see much of a difference and I would waste my money where as I could use that extra money on a Gpu. No complaints at all just the graphics card without a doubt not great. I thought changing to intel would improve the graphics but with all the advice it won’t so I think staying with the 2700x would be fine and just upgrading the gpu
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
An RX580 or 1660Ti would likely be a nice cost effective upgrade allowing both a nice jump in 1080P framerates , and a jump to max or near max quality in most games...

RX580 is available all day long at $175-$185 dollars on Anazon...; you can weigh the performance comparisons adding Vega56 ($300), 1660Ti ($270-$285), RX590 ($220), etc., to see which best suits your 'performance per dollar spent' budget /goals on your chosen games at your desired res/quality settings.
I couldn’t agree with you more. But I think changing over to nvidia would be a better choice. I saw the performance specs on the rx580/590 compared to the 1660/1660ti and without a doubt those two are better. Currently my rx570 which I’ve had for 7 months is back at the supplier as there’s issues with it. I’d rather go to nvidia as this experience has put me off amd graphics cards. But what I did like most is the amd software which was pretty cool.id rather spend that extra little of save to get good quality and good performance
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
I haven't yet really seen a reason why you'd want to switch platforms. That's a lot of money for 0 gain.
Fps is set by the cpu, the gpu has to live upto that number according to resolution and detail settings. If the Ryzen is capable of 250fps and an i9 9900k capable of 300fps in the same game, that means exactly nothing to you other than a benchmark number. The highest refresh monitors are 165Hz so that's the absolute most you'll get onscreen. Not 250, not 300. Humans are physically incapable of registering the differences in frequency above @ 120Hz. Many ppl can't tell the difference above @ 100Hz.

So with all that said, the only upgrade that makes any sense is monitor and gpu, something worthy of being an upgrade, not an expensive sideways move.
That’s exactly we are in cable of registering the difference. To be honest I can see a little difference between my old 75hz monitors and my new 144hz although in numbers they are completely different. The 2700x vs the i9 isn’t outmatched by far. As your said 50fps more. So you can’t even tell the difference. If I did upgrade my cpu to the 3rd gen ryzen cpu it might cost me more as I might have to replace my motherboard but maybe a bios update would do. But it’s great with performance why change. I mean it was released end of 2017 if I’m not mistakes so technically it’s not ancient.

Although the new Ryzens have more cores and threads it won’t make any difference
 
But I think changing over to nvidia would be a better choice. I saw the performance specs on the rx580/590 compared to the 1660/1660ti and without a doubt those two are better.
While I agree that Nvidia currently has the best options in the $200-$300 price range, the RX 580 is now in a somewhat lower price range, so it's not an entirely fair comparison. The RX 580 is now a more than 2-year old design, and an 8GB model can be found for as little as $160 after mail-in rebate, or $170-$180 without. However, I would not consider that card as a worthwhile upgrade for you for 1440p, as it is only about 15% faster than your RX 570. It has been directly competing with the GTX 1060 6GB, not the newer 1660. The RX 590 is about another 10% or so faster, but it's effectively just a minor update of the RX 580, and is also probably not worth your time, as it is priced too close to the somewhat faster and much more efficient 1660.

As I pointed out before, a 1660 would probably the absolute minimum I would consider for 1440p gaming right now. At that resolution, it should perform roughly similar to how your RX 570 performed at 1080p, or about 30-35% faster with both cards running at the same resolution. Which isn't exactly ideal, and you will likely need to turn down some graphics settings to maintain over 60fps in some of the more demanding games. A 1660 Ti, in turn, provides around 15% more performance than a 1660, and will be more likely to keep most newer games above 60fps at 1440p while still keeping graphics settings high, which probably makes it a better option. And if you want some room to grow for future games, or want to push somewhat higher frame rates on a 144Hz screen, it might be worth moving up to the next performance tier above $300, with something like an Nvidia RTX 2060 or 2060 Super, or an AMD RX 5700 or 5700XT, which just came out today.

AMD has just started releasing their new generation of graphics cards, and they are looking rather competitive so far, but at this time they have only released those cards priced at $350 and above, and have not yet announced any cards in the sub-$300 price range, so it could potentially be some months before they have really competitive products priced similar to a 1660 or 1660 Ti.

Currently my rx570 which I’ve had for 7 months is back at the supplier as there’s issues with it. I’d rather go to nvidia as this experience has put me off amd graphics cards.
That's probably more down to the manufacturer that built the card rather than AMD or Nvidia. While AMD designs and supplies the graphics chip and sets specifications for a card, the card manufacturers (like Asus, Gigabyte, MSI and so on) are responsible for building the cards and selecting other components. Much like a motherboard, they are building the board that the processor plugs into and designing its cooling system. Most of those manufacturers will produce both AMD and Nvidia cards. And of course, hardware failures can occur with all brands of cards.
 

obi1kenobi

Great
Jan 13, 2019
155
3
95
1
While I agree that Nvidia currently has the best options in the $200-$300 price range, the RX 580 is now in a somewhat lower price range, so it's not an entirely fair comparison. The RX 580 is now a more than 2-year old design, and an 8GB model can be found for as little as $160 after mail-in rebate, or $170-$180 without. However, I would not consider that card as a worthwhile upgrade for you for 1440p, as it is only about 15% faster than your RX 570. It has been directly competing with the GTX 1060 6GB, not the newer 1660. The RX 590 is about another 10% or so faster, but it's effectively just a minor update of the RX 580, and is also probably not worth your time, as it is priced too close to the somewhat faster and much more efficient 1660.

As I pointed out before, a 1660 would probably the absolute minimum I would consider for 1440p gaming right now. At that resolution, it should perform roughly similar to how your RX 570 performed at 1080p, or about 30-35% faster with both cards running at the same resolution. Which isn't exactly ideal, and you will likely need to turn down some graphics settings to maintain over 60fps in some of the more demanding games. A 1660 Ti, in turn, provides around 15% more performance than a 1660, and will be more likely to keep most newer games above 60fps at 1440p while still keeping graphics settings high, which probably makes it a better option. And if you want some room to grow for future games, or want to push somewhat higher frame rates on a 144Hz screen, it might be worth moving up to the next performance tier above $300, with something like an Nvidia RTX 2060 or 2060 Super, or an AMD RX 5700 or 5700XT, which just came out today.

AMD has just started releasing their new generation of graphics cards, and they are looking rather competitive so far, but at this time they have only released those cards priced at $350 and above, and have not yet announced any cards in the sub-$300 price range, so it could potentially be some months before they have really competitive products priced similar to a 1660 or 1660 Ti.


That's probably more down to the manufacturer that built the card rather than AMD or Nvidia. While AMD designs and supplies the graphics chip and sets specifications for a card, the card manufacturers (like Asus, Gigabyte, MSI and so on) are responsible for building the cards and selecting other components. Much like a motherboard, they are building the board that the processor plugs into and designing its cooling system. Most of those manufacturers will produce both AMD and Nvidia cards. And of course, hardware failures can occur with all brands of cards.
Nvidia definitely has a lot more options and a good line up of cards. Ye the rx580’s are old now and with the 5700 series out I’m sure there will be less production of them. They are very pricy aswell but I have seen a lot of specials on the 570/580 and 590. I could get a 1660ti which would be cheaper than the 580 and as you said I would get better performance at 1440p.i did compare the 1060,1660,1660ti and the rx580/590 and the 1660ti was by far the best regarding performance and benchmarks. So that was a good thing and your advice of the 1660ti was the best bet.

I totally agree amd are getting competitive and especially now that the 3000 series is out it’s madness.

I was thinking about the 2060 as I saw a special which was great it wasn’t much more than the 1660ti I can’t remember. That would make a huge difference without a doubt. Currently a Store nearby has a promotion on the same graphics card I have and I was thinking of buying another one and using amd crossfire for the two rx570’s and I would save more than $250 and get performance nearly as good as the 2060.

What are your thoughts about that. I no there are a lot of factors like is my psu powerful enough enough for them etc. I currently have a 750w psu and the consumption on each card is 295w. Will it be ok with my system?But it might save me a few hundred dollars and maybe put that extra money towards a new Gpu one day.

That’s true your right it is down to the manufacture r.Not all products are perfect aswell some are deemed to have an issue it’s like any other product you purchase.
 
The main problem with multi-card setups is that many games don't support them well. In some, you may be stuck with only one card getting used, and will have performance just like you have now, and in others, there may be stuttering or other issues. Even when it works properly, you typically won't see double the frame rates. So, in general, a 2060 would perform better all around.

And of course, there's the higher power draw, and in turn more heat output and noise. And on the price side of things, I suspect you could recoup some money by selling your existing card. It sounds like pricing might be a bit different where you are though.
 

Finstar

Honorable
The prices are really expensive the Asus GeForce RTX 2060 Dual OC Edition which is the cheapest 2060 is nearly three times the price of my card and the ryzen 3700x is nearly the same price as the 2060 so it’s really a lot. But selling my card is what I’m going to do as the manufacturers have me a new one due to a fault. So hopefully I can get the full value of it by selling it.

I do agree with you on that it would be caos and it would defiantly cause issues which I don’t want, it sounded like the cheaper option but there’s a lot of consequences with doing that.

The amd 5700xt is a touch more than the rtx 2060,amd your getting a lot more performance out of the 5700xt. Would you still recommend sticking with the 2060?
No, go with the 5700 XT it's significantly more powerful, almost matching the 2070 super.
Just wait for the board partner models as the reference coolers aren't that good.
 
Reactions: Mandark

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS