What is better, AMD or Intel? Why?

[GoldenI]

I am currently in the process of purchasing a new CPU for my computer as an upgrade (for gaming), and I am seeing quite the contrast in terms of views.

Some people are devoted AMD fans, whilst others are devoted Intel fans.

Why do I see people claim that an AMD 8-core processor is inferior to a high-end Intel i7 quad-core? Is it the quality of the processor from Intel, or... what? Is Intel the "Apple" of the CPU world, where you are merely paying for brand name instead of the actual quality?

I do not know as to what I wish to purchase to upgrade my system, but I know I want a processor that will last me five years.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Lol, Oh I could make it worse I assure you.

Oh, I know you could have, LOL. "The bigger the better" :lol:

Sorry, I'm done...

 

[InvalidError]

During 2002 to mid-2006 AMD taught Intel that GHz was not the end all be all. They taught Intel that IPC (Instructions Per Clock) execution was far more important. The more IPCs the CPU can execute every 1MHz, the more powerful the CPU will eventually be.

That isn't quite the right reason.

The reason Intel was pushing Netburst so hard at the time was because they had demonstrated execution pipelines running at over 10GHz in the lab and expected clock rates to continue ramping up smoothly most of the way up to there. If Intel had managed to push Netburst to 10GHz as they originally thought they would, P4 would have come out ahead of K7. However, history and even the present showed us that for various reasons, although simple silicon circuits can be pushed beyond 10GHz, practical CPUs have a hard time going much beyond 3.5GHz.

Another thing that put a nail in Netburst's coffin is the rise of power-efficiency as a primary concern. Adding multiple pipeline stages in execution units to keep (trying) to push clocks higher was causing power draw to increase with each generation of Netburst CPUs at a time where datacenters and offices were starting to demand lower power bills to get more green credentials. Since Intel had already split development between mobile/low-power CPUs and desktop CPUs due to the wide power gap between the two, Intel ended up taking the best of both worlds, merging mobile and desktop back together under Core2.

It wasn't that "IPC is more important", it was that Netburst clock rates failed to scale up as Intel originally expected them to in order to balance it out... IPC of 3.0 @ 2.5GHz or IPC of 1.5 @ 5GHz, you get an execution throughput of 7500 MIPs either way and that is the only thing that would truly mave mattered at the end of the day had it not been for the ~3.5GHz invisible brick wall Intel ran into.

BTW, "IPC per 1MHz" is redundant since IPC itself is already a per-Hz figure.

 

[sarinaide]

I guess its fair to say performance now rests on intels side but dynamism is very much in AMD's court, we only have to look at the future product line now delayed for 2014 so see that AMD's target is no longer milking the now ancient and inefficient x86 code, HSA in its brief awakening has shown to be significantly faster than intels best x86 processor doing so on a not that high power envelope, AMD's trump card is HSA and the future Kaveri architecture at least on theory should change the desktop market for the better, it will also in most certainy be the integrated graphics solution to offer mainstream performance at full HD resolutions.

untill then its probably best to roll with intel.

 

[jaguarskx]

That isn't quite the right reason.

The reason Intel was pushing Netburst so hard at the time was because they had demonstrated execution pipelines running at over 10GHz in the lab and expected clock rates to continue ramping up smoothly most of the way up to there. If Intel had managed to push Netburst to 10GHz as they originally thought they would, P4 would have come out ahead of K7. However, history and even the present showed us that for various reasons, although simple silicon circuits can be pushed beyond 10GHz, practical CPUs have a hard time going much beyond 3.5GHz.

...

BTW, "IPC per 1MHz" is redundant since IPC itself is already a per-Hz figure.

I didn't want to get overly technical with the answer. Netburst's problem was that if the calculations were incorrect, everything had to be flushed and the data re-calc'ed until they were correct. While the long pipelines meant the clock speeds could be ramped up, what happens is that the exceeding long pipeline (31 stages in Prescott) increased the chances that the calculations were incorrect, thus creating a bottleneck.

Yes, I know IPC is already a per-Hz figure, I just wanted to make it clear to those who didn't know that fact.

 

[sunnk]

i didnt saw any upper post i m answering to the question

i dont know why everyone here just say that intel is better i think most of the guys just dont know real world performance

gaming is what matters for all?what about a cpu which is the most powerful cpu for gaming but most weakest in multitasking and apps

i know no one will like ^such cpuso why only gaming?

an fx 6300 which is for about only $140 it gives somewhat same perfoormance in multitasking as i5 in apps just 5% less then i5 and cost about 50 or more $ less then a i5an fx 6300 is very good in performance against similar priced i3 it has the overclocking advantage over i3 + gives u 4 cores more its not a 3 core cpu idk why people say that first read the article of architecture then say any thing pls guysit has 6 integer cores and 3 floating cores which means 3+3=6i just wanna say that gaming doesnt means everything most of the guys like to surf do multitasking run apps etc u r getting a very cheap amd cpu with such advantages yes its weak in single threaded apps but who cares about that too much because after some years only multithreaded apps are going to be used multithreaded apps are the future of computing most of the games developer are moving towards the mutithreaded softwares so multithreaded performance matter alot

final answer amd vs intel.

intel:-gaming,singlethreaded performance,less powerconsumption,good buil,good overclocking cpu but only k one

amd:-mutithreaded performance,multitasking,good for server pcs,good for future games even the i5 and i7s are good for future,very less price for performance,very good overclocking cpus,cooler cpu against intel

http://www.techspot.com/review/586-amd-fx-8350-fx-6300/page8.html

 

[InvalidError]

I didn't want to get overly technical with the answer. Netburst's problem was that if the calculations were incorrect, everything had to be flushed and the data re-calc'ed until they were correct. While the long pipelines meant the clock speeds could be ramped up, what happens is that the exceeding long pipeline (31 stages in Prescott) increased the chances that the calculations were incorrect, thus creating a bottleneck.

The data in a long pipeline is not any less correct than the data in a short pipeline and the cost of a mispredict in a 30 stage pipeline at 5GHz would be roughly the same as the cost of a mispredict in a 15 stage pipeline at 2.5GHz. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with longer pipelines aside from extra clock/DFF power as long as clocks can scale accordingly.

Also, with HyperThreading, the P4 could execute deterministic instructions from the other thread while waiting for the conditional branch result for the first thread or vice-versa, which greatly reduces the need for accurate branch prediction and any penalties incurred from mispredicts since a mispredict or stall on one thread frees up associated execution resources for the other. If multi-threaded applications and games had been more common during P4/HT's commercial life, it would have looked much better.

 

[Chad Boga]

Lol, Oh I could make it worse I assure you. The downside about this monitor is after awhile, it feels like its normal size. And using the 17 inch monitors at my college, well, they just seem so tiny! Once you go 27 inch, you don't go back.

Well mine's bigger than yours.

I've got 30 inches.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

i didnt saw any upper post i m answering to the question

Better grammar and punctuation, please. It was very hard to read that reply...

Anyway, to the content of your reply, let's all go out and buy AMD! The Piledriver FX CPU's are the best CPU's ever made! (absolutely drenched with sarcasm)

That's a fanboy reply if I ever saw one. The way you describe it, Intel is only good for gaming, and might as well not even exist otherwise. Go take all of the rhetoric somewhere else.

This thread was answered perfectly well before you got here and there was no need for a reply like yours, laced with obvious AMD fanboy love.

 

[user_account_]

Having once been a happy customer with a AMD 955 BE for a year I decided to go with a Intel i5 2500k build and for me personally I wish I had gone to Intel many years ago. The performance increase over the 955 in gaming was for me very noticeable mostly in BF3 I actually gained a good 7-13 FPS. Extracting large files, rendering video, desktop & general uses just seem so much faster. I would go with a i5 2500k any day and they overclock a treat with a good cooler. Before AMD fanboys start raging you can get decent O/C with AMD but for me i5 wins any day.

 

[nekulturny]

Before AMD fanboys start raging you can get decent O/C with AMD but for me i5 wins any day.

*rages*... LOL.. Depends on the i5 in question, otherwise you're right.. But theres some i5s that really aren't that good.. Enter the i5-23xx series.

Although I question the actual importance of 7-13FPS. If you're already getting 60, not much point beyond that.

 

[nekulturny]

Well mine's bigger than yours.

I've got 30 inches.

*runs and hides*

 

[nekulturny]

Better grammar and punctuation, please. It was very hard to read that reply...

Anyway, to the content of your reply, let's all go out and buy AMD! The Piledriver FX CPU's are the best CPU's ever made! (absolutely drenched with sarcasm)

That's a fanboy reply if I ever saw one. The way you describe it, Intel is only good for gaming, and might as well not even exist otherwise. Go take all of the rhetoric somewhere else.

This thread was answered perfectly well before you got here and there was no need for a reply like yours, laced with obvious AMD fanboy love.

Suddenly I feel the urge to break out into my rendition of Bad Romance by Lady Gaga.

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

Suddenly I feel the urge to break out into my rendition of Bad Romance by Lady Gaga.

:lol:

 

[skitz9417]

well im changing form amd to intel i5 3470 what has a good performce over the phemons

 

[FinneousPJ]

Well, obviously there's no single answer. You really have to look at an individual budget and usage plan to decide.

 

[nekulturny]

well im changing form amd to intel i5 3470 what has a good performce over the phemons

Have you not learned anything during the time you've been here? You have a 550 TI, unless you plan on upgrading that, theres absolutely no point.

 

[skitz9417]

and im getting a hd 7850

 

[nekulturny]

7870 for $210 after rebate, dont be scurred! :lol:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161411

 

[skitz9417]

yea im going for the hd 7850 or hd 7870 but i live australia

 

[nekulturny]

Oh, that means bad news for you. Yes, I know how stupidly overpriced video cards and power supplies are for you.

 

[skitz9417]

yea but i can get a hd 7850 for $150 or a hd 7870 for $254

 

[sunnk]

Better grammar and punctuation, please. It was very hard to read that reply...

Anyway, to the content of your reply, let's all go out and buy AMD! The Piledriver FX CPU's are the best CPU's ever made! (absolutely drenched with sarcasm)

That's a fanboy reply if I ever saw one. The way you describe it, Intel is only good for gaming, and might as well not even exist otherwise. Go take all of the rhetoric somewhere else.

This thread was answered perfectly well before you got here and there was no need for a reply like yours, laced with obvious AMD fanboy love.

lol lmfao cant stop laughing lol :lol: bro i m a fanboy? your post look like that more u r the biggest fanboy of intel i have ever seen :lol: have u ever used amd fx series cpu and did you compared them to intels core i chips?no i dont think so my one friend have i5 2500k and my one friend have i3 2100 and one friend have fx 4100(low budget build)i have a fx 6100. yeah i know intel is better for gaming and multitasking and many more but i m not telling anything wrong i think you have i5 2500k right pls go and compare your i5 with anyone of your freinds fx 6100 in multitasking and apps u wont see any difference between themyeah i agree i5 and even i3 does well against fx 4100 and fx 6100 in single threaded programs and gaming but u think an i5 of $200 is a very good choice over fx 6100 which is of $120 do you think that paying more $80 for gaming worth?first use fx cpus compare it to the cpus which is relative in pricei think u havent used any fx cpus thats why u are speaking just rubbish wake up bro u also know that an fx cpus are bad but only bulldozers seems a bit bad to me a piledriver isnt that bad and even the bulldozer if u look at the pricei m a kid of 14 yrs i m in school in 9 th standard dont know that well english but i also know that my english isnt that bad at all i have written that sentence very clear but u cnt read it u are getting difficulties i dont know why i think u r using your mind more then u should

i m not a fanboy at all but can you say that amd doesnt have any advantage over intel when we look at the price?
first go and comepare real world performance dont look at the reviewu will understand then what i m sayinghave a nice dayu need to refresh ur mind pls clean it its full of dirt and crappy things filled with intels papers i think ur getting money from intel for saying false is that right?i m not giving any bad advice to any people because i dont wanna poor ther money into the water i know the value of moneyif u r elder then me then sorry uncle for behaving rude sorry but u r selfish grandpa

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

:lol: :lol: :lol: I seriously LOL'd

I'm not even close being a fanboy, but that's fine...

 

[sunnk]

i talked in that manner because u called me a fanboy but seriously go and check the performance of chip u will be shocked as i got when i saw the performance of fx 4100 up against i3 which cost similar the fx 4100 does well in multitasking and multhreaded apps it does about 20% well but when it comes to single threaded performance then fx 4100 fall behind for about 7% and about 3% in gaming.in only skyrim i3 was getting about 5-6 fps more and in other games it was just giving the same performance and fps in both rigs there were hd 5770 gpus were used in 1336x768 res they both perfomed similarbecause of that i got fx 6100 for my rig i m downloading softwares now i will show you the results after the download will be succeded

 

[nekulturny]

Its bad form to overuse smiley faces. I find it pretentious to use several smileys in one sentence, or in the middle of sentences. I'll tell you what else I find obnoxious, when people use things like >.< or <.< >.> or xD excessively. And don't get me started on people who go jajajaja or trololoolol. I tend to want to introduce them to my chain wrench.