Why is intel faster then AMD?

[Danbuscus25]

ok, so take an amd 5.0GHz 8 core cpu and compare it with intels best cpu. amd has a higher clock speed and the same amount of cores.... so, im just wondering what it is that makes intel whoop amds butt in benchmarks?

 

[sincreator]

They have a higher performance per core over AMD. Most applications/games still use 4 or less cores/threads so Intel usually wins. If a game or application uses more than 4 cores/threads AMD and Intel are a little more even.

PS: Don't forget that Intel's K series chips can overclock as well. 😉

 

[Ahmadjon]

Intel has better performance per MHz!

 

[maddogfargo]

When comparing 1 core to 1 core, the reason Intel is currently faster is the same reason that AMD was faster than Intel just a few years ago:

More efficient design and better IPC

 

[dwatterworth]

The differences are in the fundamental building blocks of the CPU.

It's sort of like different models of cars. They will generally all get you to the same place but can do so in different ways.

The differences in architecture are combined with node process (essentially the size of the transistors that make up the CPU), the number and size of caches, power budgets for each component of the chip and many other things that all need to be considered part of the whole.

Outside of the CPU primary elements such as chipset transfer speeds/bandwidths, supported memory speeds and again, many other factors, all combine to form the resultant performance of any given chip.

 

[dextermat]

Hi,

Intel isn't always the winner although I favor their CPU.

On some games and application, Intel is sometime better while with other AMd would be better.

Example, amd is great with photoshop (if you compare core i5 vs fx 8 core) since photoshop uses multicore.
But in planetside 2, the core is 5 is a better than fx.

 

[gamerk316]

GHz is just a measure of how many cycles of work a CPU can perform a second. Intel can do more work per cycle. As a result, Intel is faster.

An analogy, you have a Ferrari and a F150. Obviously, the Ferrari can go faster. But if you have to carry a few tons worth of cargo, guess which one gets the job done first? The slower F150 can do it in a trip or two, where the Ferrari needs to make multiple trips, even if each trip is at a much faster speed. That's Intel/AMD in a nutshell: Intel does more work per clock.

 

[zielritter]

GHz is just a measure of how many cycles of work a CPU can perform a second. Intel can do more work per cycle. As a result, Intel is faster.

An analogy, you have a Ferrari and a F150. Obviously, the Ferrari can go faster. But if you have to carry a few tons worth of cargo, guess which one gets the job done first? The slower F150 can do it in a trip or two, where the Ferrari needs to make multiple trips, even if each trip is at a much faster speed. That's Intel/AMD in a nutshell: Intel does more work per clock.

Beautiful. You appealed to both my inner motor-head and PC nerd at once while still providing a spot on analogy. Props.

 

[Danbuscus25]

GHz is just a measure of how many cycles of work a CPU can perform a second. Intel can do more work per cycle. As a result, Intel is faster.

An analogy, you have a Ferrari and a F150. Obviously, the Ferrari can go faster. But if you have to carry a few tons worth of cargo, guess which one gets the job done first? The slower F150 can do it in a trip or two, where the Ferrari needs to make multiple trips, even if each trip is at a much faster speed. That's Intel/AMD in a nutshell: Intel does more work per clock.

OMG, thank you sooo much for clearing that up for me. ive always thought GHz was the overall speed of the cpu, not just 1 factor.