Question are the ryzen processors better than intels?

Jan 19, 2020
ive never gotten around to watching youtube videos or anything but i would like to know any major differences between them :)


Nov 21, 2014
Yes and no, intels (so far) has better effective performance and higher overclock capabilities so for gaming and all they have a slight edge, ryzens have more cores, so they do better in multitasking and if you, idk, stream around enconde shizzle they will prove better....

all i all i think the ryzen is better value because you can throw any game at em and have great FPS provided you GPU is not succ, the .... what? 4-7 fps difference on an intel for something already running above 60 fps makes no difference.


Nov 23, 2013
The answer is depends.

It depends on what you'll be doing with the PC...the only way to be sure your purchase is best suited to your needs is to read reviews and hit up Youtube content like hardwareunboxed.
I would say it depends on what you want to do and budget. I disagree with the above that if gaming you default to Intel. For example if you have deep pockets and want the best FPS in games at lower resolutions then you go Intel i7/i9. However Ryzen offers a much better price/performance ratio and is not that far below the i7/i9. Also at higher resolutions the difference between Intel and Ryzen diminishes and becomes nothing. I personally don’t like the i5 as it’s limited to 6 threads and this is already showing to be a weakness.
Last edited:
ive never gotten around to watching youtube videos or anything but i would like to know any major differences between them :)
to summarize things simplistically, which is about how I understand it anyway...

Ryzen 3rd gen processors have slightly better IPC and higher core counts with even low-end processors including SMT, AMD's term for hyperthreading.

Intel processors can overclock to higher clock speeds, which overcomes IPC defecits. But you have to buy high-end to properly exploit the potential; high-end processors, e.g., 9900K, 9700K, high-end overclockable motherboards for correct chipsets and powerful VRM's, and high-end (closed loop) cooling.

In the end, Intel's very top-end processors still enjoy slight gaming advantages when overclocked (that includes 9900KS and other factory-overclocked variants and refreshes), usually when gaming at low enough resolution where the GPU is not the bottleneck. But for productivity/content creation apps that like processing threads you can find cheaper processor/motherboard/memory combinations with AMD that outperforms (many times far outperforms) Intel's offerings at any price point or market segment.

With pricing where it is now Intel's low and mid-range processors (I3's and I5's) are largely irrelevant in the market today when compared on price/performance basis. Many would argue so are the high-end (I9's), except when even 1fps makes the difference and cost is no object to achieving that.

But to answer 'which is better...' is a lot more difficult. I suppose I'd say Intel's are better because they've had a lot more opportunities to get the most out of 14nm. But if the newer and more efficient process is better that has to go to AMD/TSMC and the 7nm process used on the Zen2 CPU dies. If you're limited to buying from a well established pre-built mfr, e.g. Dell, HP, Lenovo, you'll probably find Intel is better if simply because they don't offer a proper range of AMD alternatives. It's really hard to define what 'better' means to someone else as it's so personal.

EDIT add: and oh'll also find Intel is better when used in various scientific, engineering and mathematics applications that were compiled to benefit Intel processors, e.g., MatLab. There aren't all that many and so are properly considered edge-use cases, but if yours happens to be one you'll appreciate knowing so. You'll have to ask very specifically in the support forums for that app. to find out.
Last edited:


Oct 11, 2017
Quite simply, 7nm. There used to be a debate better IPC or more core count. Now it's just 7nm. Intel's 10nm could compete with AMDs 7nm, but where is Intel's 10nm? Intel doesn't have an answer right now. Zen 2 is simply the best choice right now and AMD is flooding the market with as many chips as they can before Intel can respond.


Jan 5, 2015
And don't forget, by the time Intel has an answer, Zen 3 aka Ryzen 4000 series will be coming out probably this year.

According to this article you may see another 8-10% ipc performance gain. After that they'll probably be aiming at Zen 4 and probably an am5 socket with ddr5.

I think Intel got caught napping and they'd better figure out something quickly. AMD vs Intel may be David vs Goliath, but David is gaining ground little by little lately, and we know how that story turned out.

Being honest, in my opinion, there's really no reason to even look at Intel right now unless you're talking about the i9 9900k.

If I were an Intel fan, where I'd be aggravated is the fact the i7 used to have hyperthreading and they pulled it from i7 and reserved hyperthreading for i9. Intel doing that feels like a cash grab.

When you're paying over 300 for the i7 and you only get 8 cores and no hyperthreading, what does your i7 become? A 3 year chip maybe? Think about how games will develop etc. Which CPU would you rather be running in your gaming system 3 years from now, an i7 9700k or a 3700x? I think I'd rather have the 3700x. At least with the 3700x you have hyperthreading and as games become more threaded, that will make a difference.