Amd or intel gaming processors. Which is better - AMD or Intel? Which AMD or Intel processor should you choose for modern games?

The processor industry is no less dynamic than other areas of information technology. Constant improvements to the latest microarchitectures and the release of new ones, although they did not make revolutionary breakthroughs at the beginning of 2016, did give us a wider choice within certain classes of central processors.

Once again we will discuss which processor is better - Intel or AMD, and also compare processors for the system for different tasks. I’ll say right away that the opinion in this article is subjective and can be either supported or refuted by anyone and without consequences. This article will not defend one side or another; everything will be based on the real state of affairs of the global central processor market.

In addition, we will touch a little on the segment of mobile solutions. Specific answers for systems for certain types of tasks will be given in the conclusions, I advise you to hold on and read to the end.

For convenience and quick transition, the contents of the article are given:

AMD vs Intel. A short historical introduction

So, let's go. Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices were founded around the same time: in 1968 and 1969, respectively. That is, both companies have vast experience both in the production of processors and in competition with each other. But for some reason, Intel is much more famous among ordinary “users”. And even in some antediluvian technical schools they study in detail the old i8080 processor, which is sore for all technical students. AMD at this time simply released clones of the 8080 in the form of Am9080 processors. And the first successful AMD processor of its own design can be called the Am2900 processor.

Okay, let's not talk about sad old processors with frequency at 3 MHz, made according to technical process 6 microns and equipped with an 8-bit data bus. Better yet, let's slowly move directly to the topic of our discussion, and to modern processors with more joyful characteristics.

Myths about AMD

I would immediately like to dispel the myths about “burning” and “not subject to” overclocking AMD processors. To date, such statements are based on “naked” rumors. About ten years ago there were many precedents for the failure of processors like the Athlon 1400, which simply burned out after the cooler cooling the processor radiator failed. Yes, it was relevant then, but talking about it when it’s 2015 and AMD processors are equipped with excellent thermal protection technology is simply blasphemy.

And the thermal regime depends on various factors, and not just on the processor itself, for example, the efficiency of the processor cooler, as well as the quality applying thermal paste. Regarding overclocking, I won’t say much and cite specific processor models, but will simply state the fact that there are processors from the “Black Edition” series on sale, which are oriented towards overclocking by the manufacturer itself. It’s the same with the new FX from AMD, they have not only proven themselves to be suitable for good overclocking, but also boast world records in overclocking.

The negative myths about AMD are over, now we can remember about Intel. There seemed to be no negative myths about Intel. In those days when Athlones were burning, one could only hear flattering reviews about the Pentium. This processor was known and revered by many, and even now when asked: “What kind of computer do you have?” Sometimes you can hear a proud answer -"Pentium".

2016 Comparison of the main processor lines from AMD and Intel

Let me sharply declare that as of 2016, among AMD and Intel we can confidently identify the clear leader in the processor hit parade. And based on this article, you can choose and buy a processor, truly taking into account all your needs. If, in the article which video card is better Since we were unable to identify a large-scale leader, here everything is a little clearer. But this leader will be voiced with rather general notes, since no one has canceled the specifics of the work and budget spheres, but more on that later.

In this subsection of the article, we will go through the main lines of processors from the two companies and analyze their performance under various types of loads, and in the conclusions, as promised, recommendations will be given for choosing a processor for certain tasks. Accordingly, taking into account specific tasks, the advantage of certain processors will change significantly.

The description and resolution of the dilemma “which is better: amd or intel” should be approached comprehensively and from different viewing angles, because an ordinary consumer needs one thing, but an avid gamer or overclocker needs something completely different. I’ll say right away that the answer will be dynamic, and I will try to update the article as radically new lines of processors from both companies are born, because this year one is leading, and next year the other.

Let's start a little from afar. When Intel quietly and peacefully continued to produce good and high-quality processors, the AMD Athlon 64 line with a modified K8 microarchitecture was born. It was after the appearance of these processors that many started talking about AMD, and many even moved away from Intel at that time. Several years ago there were more or less equal battles between Phenom K10 processors and the corresponding Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad models from Intel. During these periods, a widespread opinion emerged that AMD processors in the mid-range and budget price range were superior to Intel in terms of price/quality ratio. For AMD, everything seemed to be going very, very well, but then the Nehalem microarchitecture appeared, which dealt a significant blow to AMD and revolutionized the processor market.

Core i3/i5/i7 on Sandy Bridge began to actively sell out, raising Intel higher and higher above AMD. A little later, Intel added heat to the fire by releasing second-generation Sandy Bridge processors. They turned out to be no less successful than their predecessors: many people loved the i5-2400, 2500, i7-2700, and for good reason. Let's not delve into microarchitecture, I’ll just say that Intel developers have thoroughly refined it, adding many different technologies and features.

A little time passed, and Intel announced third generation processors - Ivy Bridge. The intel core i5-3570K, i7-3770K and many others processors did not go unnoticed, although they cannot boast of significant improvements. But given the fact that the prices for Ivy and Sandy Bridge are not separated by an abyss, it would be more reasonable to purchase a slightly polished Ivy Bridge.

What did AMD do at this time? AMD calmly continues to refine the K10 microarchitecture, slowly adding frequencies to the Phenom. Although AMD Phenom II 9xx processors look very good on the processor market, due to their capabilities and price, they are already obsolete and it is quite difficult for them to compete with new products from Intel.

Then the AMD Llano line of hybrid processors is announced, with a focus on integrated graphics directly on the processor chip. The solution is quite interesting, considering that Llano graphics show good performance, but in computing tests these hybrid chips show the result of dual-core Intel Core i3-2100. Some people will like the option of saving on a video card, especially since the savings are significant and Llano processors will be noted by us in the results as an interesting budget option. In addition, a newer line of A-series processors was released - these are Trinity processors, they offer more powerful graphics than Llano, which looks even more delicious for entry-level home systems. Trinity graphics are rightfully considered the best in the world among those integrated on a processor chip.

Things didn't go well in the top segment. Everyone was looking forward to the enchanting launch of the legendary processors based on the Bulldozer architecture. Everyone was expecting a revolution in the processor market, but instead a crude 8-core product was born. In addition, these 8 cores are not entirely complete, since the developers combined every two cores in the Bulldozer microarchitecture into 1 module, which can be compared (conditionally) with one core of Ivy Bridge processors. But I would like to emphasize once again that this comparison is very conditional, since depending on the type of tasks, this very convention can be broken to smithereens both in favor of Intel and AMD.

Then a revision of Bulldozer was announced - Vishera processors with microarchitecture Piledriver – which, according to AMD representatives, gives an increase of around 10-15%, while having a lower TDP and all this is supported by a very tempting price.

Of course, it should be noted that the Bulldozer processors and, in particular, their improved version - Vishera– show excellent results under multi-threaded loads, this is clearly visible in the 3d max working tests:

Less is more

FX8350 beats i7-3770K. Approximately the same situation will be observed in all applications that can create 8 high-quality threads, that is, in most graphics packages, as well as in any other types of complex calculations. If we analyze the results, we can see that the gap from the i7-3770K is insignificant, but given the approximate prices of these models - $340 for the i7-3770K and $209 for the FX-8350, I think questions about a more profitable processor specifically for these types of tasks should be removed. Also, the even cheaper FX-8320 will be interesting for these tasks.

But when a single-threaded load falls on the processor, due to the same unfinished microarchitecture, the bulldozer often loses to opponents from Intel. Those same games typically fail to load more than four cores, which ends up exposing the shortcomings of the Bulldozer cores individually. AMD Vishera processors have corrected the situation a little, but the lag is still noticeable. For clarity, here are some game tests:

Of course, the gaming load falls largely on the video card, but the processor is an equally important link here. Moreover, games that are quite demanding on processor resources often slip through.

The sample of tests presented is too small, but the general trend of testing results on both domestic and foreign sites is exactly this: from the tests it is clearly visible that the i5-3570K confidently outperforms opponents from AMD in the form of the new FX-4300, FX-6300 and FX-8350.

Already starting in 2015, the Sunnywell company AMD, which had practically no hopes for innovation, announced, of course, the introduction of a new line called Carrizo. The representatives stipulated that the Carizzo is the sixth generation, but it is not clear why the little-known Brazos is not included in the accounting. Well, okay, it’s worth highlighting the following points of this sensational line presented in Germany.

Carizzo is located exclusively on one chip, and before that the southbridge and the graphics chip were located on two crystals. The functionality of the device is based on 28 nanometers using the Global Foundries process.
Four cores have Excavator architecture. The processor frequency was raised only by 1 MHz compared to the previous Steamroller, so the data processing performance per core, alas, increased slightly, but overall everything is not so bad - an increase of about 15%, while generally maintaining the previous principles of data processing .
The graphic side has also been updated. In particular, the graphics core received 512 KB of second-level memory. Significant performance improvements are seen when matching tessellation, and very importantly, color reproduction is lossless.

At the same time, Intel did not skimp on the creation and release of a new generation of processors, which were called Broadwell. And it’s worth noting right away that every fan of the Intel team was disappointed. The processor is based on Haswell, made using a 14-nm process technology. The core functionality and microarchitecture did not receive any changes, so the desktop Broadwell turned out to be, to put it mildly, not great.

One of the advantages is a reduction in heat generation. An integrated graphics core Iris Pro 6200 has also been added. These are, perhaps, all the main important additions to the operation of the processor from Intel.

But if we look at it in general, for most games, AMD processors also perform quite well.

In these tests, the main thing for us is not the specific FPS of two games, but the general trend of FX processors lagging behind in games. In the conclusions we will note this fact, which will go to AMD’s liability.

Laptop CPUs

Intel has reigned supreme in the laptop processor segment for quite some time now, and it reigns very thoroughly. Laptops of both budget and top-end classes feature Core ix processors, which we praised a little higher.

The release of Llano processors did not change the balance of power very much, but it did introduce some variety into the budget laptop segment. But the Trinity processors can be called a truly good attack from AMD. Even more powerful integrated graphics at an affordable price, and these processors support Dual Graphics technology. This technology allows the integrated graphics of Trinity processors to work in conjunction with a discrete adapter. As a result, the combination of “integrated Trinty graphics + discrete Radeon HD 7670M” looks very attractive, taking into account the total graphics performance and low cost.

We can safely say that in the budget segment of laptops, the AMD Trinity A4 and A6 series are very interesting for the buyer, as they guarantee more powerful graphics than the integrated graphics in Intel processors.

In the mid-range mobile segment, A10 processors paired with HD 7670 will also delight with their graphics performance. But already in the fight against certain Core i5s they will have problems on the computing front. With all this, the middle class of laptops remains subject to fierce competition and many will choose the A10 + HD 7670. So in the middle and budget segment, determining which processor is better for a laptop is not so easy.

Returning to the same Carrizo from AMD, which was released in 2015, it is worth noting that the system already has an integrated UVD-6 video decoder. Thanks to this decoder, it became possible to watch video in H.264 and H.265 formats. As stated by the Carrizo manufacturers, this is the world's first chip for laptops that can decode H.265.

Intel is also not asleep when it comes to laptop graphics, but it lags significantly behind AMD, as strange as it may sound. Thus, testing was carried out in which Carrizo from AMD and Broadwell from Intel competed, playing 4-K video in HEVC format. The results were stunning: when playing video, a laptop with AMD Carrizo did not load the processor even half, while its competitor Inrel was loaded at 80, and sometimes even 100%.

Thus, if back in 2013 Intel was in the lead, the situation has changed somewhat in 2015, and now a self-respecting user will prefer a laptop with greater graphics performance running Carrizo processors from AMD.

I would like to note that purchasing a high-performance laptop is a very controversial thing, I advise you to read the article “ laptop or desktop PC”, which will not allow you to stumble on this deceptive front.

Okay, let's not dwell on processors for laptops, but rather move on to the conclusions.

AMD and Intel. Which processors are better? Conclusions

It remains to sum up the battle between AMD and Intel.From what was said above, everything becomes clear, but let’s judge objectively, because everyone has the right to make a mistake, and we will believe that this mistake will be corrected. Let's pay attention to the class of tasks performed by these processors in order to ultimately judge fully.

Processor for a budget system with undemanding tasks

First, let’s answer what is better than amd or intel in the budget segment of the market. Budget systems are quite widespread. These can be both home computers and office systems, where the boss is trying to buy a fleet of machines for the price of the configuration of one normal system.
Here, it seems to me, we should give the advantage to AMD. The same new Trinity, such as the A4-5300 for $50-60, will look great in budget home systems, especially when trying to load the system with graphical tasks such as games. Well, or at worst, you can equip the system with the cheapest Llano, for $40.

For an office fleet of machines, Trinity will also be a good solution, but here they are being squeezed by Pentium G, since in computing tasks they show a higher level of performance due to the second generation Sandy Bridge architecture and a slightly larger volume cache memory.

The 2015 AMD Carrizo will be an excellent solution not only for home use, but may well take pride of place among office machines. But AMD's main goal was to release a completely new processor that would satisfy the functionality needs of laptops.

The Intel company, with Broadwell, which has become the “unloved child,” is largely losing ground to AMD’s competitors. So, in particular, although Broadwell is equipped with a powerful graphics core Iris Pro 6200, the functionality at the level of office calculations leaves much to be desired. Broadwell is not far removed from Sandy Bridge, which really handled computing tasks at the proper level.

So for an office fleet of machines, a good choice would be the budget Intel Pentium G processor on Sandy Bridge, released in 2013, or the new 2015 Carrizo from AMD.

Processor for gaming computer

The class of gaming computers is the most comprehensive, because it covers as average? So is the top segment of processors, there is no place for integrated graphics, and systems are usually equipped with high-performance video cards, which do the bulk of the work in games. But a lot also depends on the processor, since no one has canceled the balance in the system.

From the previously analyzed test results, we can confidently say that the average gaming system requires Intel. If you don’t mind overpaying a little, and at the same time you want to get a certain reserve for the next year or two in most games, then the Core i5 on Ivy Bridge in most cases will be the best option than any of the Vishera. In no way do I want to say that Vishera is absolutely unsuitable for games. Due to its price, the same FX-6300 will be a very good option for an inexpensive gaming system, although here it is being squeezed by the Core i3.

But the primacy for gaming loads and a home system like “for all tasks” is still with the Core i5, as the mainstream option can be called the Core i5-3570 or i5-3470 . In particularly extreme gaming scenarios, a Core i7 would be an even more advanced solution, but at this stage of development of the gaming industry and the classic use case, its performance is in most cases excessive.

So, for a good gaming system, an Intel core i5 (in some cases i7) is recommended, and for a cheaper gaming system, the FX-6300 is a good choice - here you need to look at secondary tasks and, based on them, give preference to one or another option.

Processor for demanding computing work

Video/audio processing and encoding, work in complex graphics applications, as well as any other type of complex computing work or work on entry-level servers - all this can often be divided into multiple threads.

As we said earlier, multi-threading is the FX-8350's strong point. At its low cost, this processor shows the level of the i7-3770K, and sometimes even surpasses it in the above types of tasks. Therefore, for workloads, if you don’t want to spend extra money, use only the FX-8350.

Of course, if you have extra funds, you can overpay and get a universal i7-3770K, both for work and for games, which will also be a reasonable option, but still at the well-known price/performance ratio for complex computing tasks FX- The 8350 confidently outperforms its opponents from Intel.

Also, do not forget about the “hard solution” from Intel, in the form of the same Core i7-3970X. This processor is the best desktop option: it can do everything better than anyone else, but there’s only one thing it can’t do – be cheap, its cost is about $1000. An impeccable extreme option for those who like to throw money.

The processor options given here for different types of tasks are very general and cannot accurately reflect each individual case, where secondary, but no less important tasks may arise, and the purchase budget may also have a significant impact.

If we talk about the financial side of the issue, then the AMD Carrizo processor is included in the price range from 350 to 750 US dollars, which is determined by the category of application. Accordingly, laptop processors are comparatively more expensive than desktop processors, so again you have to choose according to your accumulated budget. But it’s just worth noting that Carrizo, based on eight graphics and four processor cores, additionally has technology to optimize operation with 15 W power. Thanks to this, the new device works 2.4 times faster than the previous generation Kaveri.

The minimum cost of Intel processors in 2015 is $380, which does not at all correspond to the parameters inherent in Broadwell. In particular, the graphics core of the latest generation Iris Pro 6200 played a major role in cost; a slightly improved microarchitecture, which simply improved its Haswell predecessor, as well as a high rate of heat reduction. And this, perhaps, is all that Intel can boast about its latest work.

This is how the comparison of processors turned out and the answer to the question: “Which processors are better, Intel or AMD?”

Perhaps there are some controversial points, I will be very glad to see your corrections or additions in the comments, but without a holivar or offensive bias.

Finally, we unanimously wish AMD to pleasantly surprise us with the Streamroller microarchitecture soon, and also try to give a worthy rebuff to Intel, because we don’t need a monopoly and inflated prices.

We wish Intel to reduce prices for its processors and continue to release the same good, powerful and high-quality products.

And to you, dear friends, I wish stable operation of the “hearts” of your computers, regardless of who and when they were released. All the best!

How much money would you like to spend on a CPU? Depending on the price segment, the difference in performance can be very significant. Of course, it also depends on what requirements you place on your computer. It all starts with CPU models costing up to about 10,000 rubles, which are intended for simple PCs with low performance, but sufficient for office work and web surfing.

In the category from 15,000 rubles, it is possible to get much more power. These models can be equipped with already good gaming computers. At this price point, AMD offers some attractive quad-core models, but Intel also has something to offer, such as Core i5 processors with four cores and high clock speeds.

Core i7 from Intel and high-end AMD Ryzen 7 series models usually cost from 20,000 rubles and justify their use only in serious systems. Even more money will only need to be spent by those who want to achieve fast performance of resource-intensive specialized software optimized for multi-core systems.

CoolerMaster V8: A CPU cooler can be truly huge.

Choosing a processor: what to look for

Anyone who wants to get the best option for their money should first of all pay attention to the overall performance of the model when purchasing a processor. However, the level of energy consumption also plays an important role. When evaluating a specific model, parameters such as clock speeds, number of cores, and the presence of special functions are also important.

We talk about how the CHIP laboratory tests processors comprehensively and objectively in. Next, we will tell you what you should pay attention to when choosing a specific model.

1. CPU performance

Performance is the most important parameter when evaluating a processor. Anyone who knows exactly what tasks will be assigned to the computer can glean additional useful information from the corresponding benchmarks. For office work, a high score in the Excel benchmark is important.

1.

Overall score: 100

Price/quality ratio: 76

2.

Overall rating: 93.6

Price/quality ratio: 100

3.

Overall rating: 86.6

Price/quality ratio: 73

2. Processor manufacturer

Essentially the question is: Intel or AMD? Both processor manufacturers have their advantages and disadvantages. Intel CPUs now feature higher clock speeds and execute a higher number of instructions per cyclic clock (IPC), making them shine in applications that require single-core performance.

Since 2017, AMD has entered the arms race with new Ryzen processors. The manufacturer presented very good 6- and 8-core CPUs with multi-threading support, beating Intel's price offer in every segment.

3. CPU power consumption level

Processors convert a large amount of energy into heat. AMD chips need up to 95 W, while Intel’s this parameter reaches 140 W for the fastest models. In the segment of mainstream CPUs for desktop systems, power consumption levels are at 65 and 95 W, respectively.

Those who are not assembling a workstation and do not plan to overclock the processor may not bother too much when purchasing a power supply and a cooler. However: before purchasing components, you should add up the power consumption of all parts of the system to select a power supply with the appropriate characteristics.

4. Specifications

Anyone who wants to equip an existing computer with a new processor must ensure that the CPU matches the motherboard and its socket. For current models (which are no more than 2-3 years old), the choice will be quite simple: processors with Skylake and KabyLake architecture from Intel require socket 1151, Ryzen processors from AMD require socket AM4.

The fact that the CPU is compatible with the socket type does not guarantee that everything will work as it should. Your best bet is to find the current motherboard manual on the manufacturer's website - this will usually contain an exact list of supported processors.

Rating leader (extreme processors): Intel Core i9-7900X

This CPU from Intel with its ten cores set the heat during testing, as they say, and demonstrated performance at the highest level. Of course, the cost is also enormous - about 73,000 rubles. For ordinary users, such a processor is still redundant.

But those who need it will find in it a chip for the high-end LGA2066 socket platform with a base clock frequency of 3.3 GHz, which can increase to 4.5 GHz if necessary. At the same time, technically, despite the index “7” in the designation, we are talking about a processor of the generation not of Kaby Lake, but of Skylake in an extreme version.

Test results

Intel Core i9-7900X is a new top-level processor from Intel. During testing, the Skylake X generation processor performed fantastically: in many benchmarks it confidently beats its predecessor, the Intel Core i7-6950X. In many, but not all. The new cache structure requires its toll. However, the processor is a definite buy recommendation for anyone looking to maximize their computer's processing power.

Advantages

Highest performance
Ten CPU cores
Very promising
Good value for money
Large L2 cache size

Flaws

Very expensive
High energy consumption

Intel Core i9-7900X test results

Price/quality ratio
Fine
Place in the overall ranking
7 of 28

Price/quality ratio: 65
CPU performance (100%): 84.1

Assembling a computer can be a very difficult task, especially if you are not experienced in such tasks. There are a huge number of components that you can use, but it is important to choose components that are compatible with each other and will provide maximum performance.

The central processing unit is one of the most important components of a computer; it is here that all calculations are performed. It controls the operation of all other components, so it is important to choose the right one. At the moment, devices from two manufacturers are available to you: AMD or Intel processor. These companies create almost all the PC processors in the world. But they are quite different from each other. In this article we will look at how these processors differ so that you can choose which processor is better amd or intel in 2016.

Before we move on to the detailed characteristics of the processor and technologies, let's go back to the roots and see how both companies started.

Intel appeared a little earlier than AMD, it was created by Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore in 1968. Initially, the company was developing integrated circuits, then began producing processors. The first processor was the Intel 8008 model. Back in the 90s, the company became the largest processor manufacturer. And he still continues to invent and implement new technologies.

Oddly enough, AMD or Advanced Micro Devices was created with the support of Intel. The company was created a year later - in 1969 and its goal was to develop microcircuits for computers. At first, Intel supported AMD, for example, by providing licenses for the use of technologies, as well as financially, but then their relationship soured and the companies became direct competitors. Now let's move closer to the processors themselves and their characteristics.

Price and performance

Both Intel and AMD offer processors in a wide price range. But AMD processors are cheaper. The cheapest are AMD Sempron and Athlon, these dual-core A-series processors sell starting at $30. The dual-core Intel Celeron G1820 is slightly more expensive at $45. But this does not mean that AMD chips are definitely better. Intel is known to give better performance for the same price. You'll get a more powerful processor if you choose a Celeron, Pentium, or Core from Intel. If you compare amd and intel 2016, the former consume less energy, generate less heat, and higher performance is confirmed by many tests.

But there are a few exceptions to this rule; AMD sells quad-core processors for much less than Intel, for example, you can get the A6-5400K for just $45. If you're running software that needs a lot of cores but can't afford an Intel Core i5, then you'll be better off with AMD. The same is true for eight-core processors from the AMD FX series, which are much cheaper than Intel Core i7.

AMD chips also provide the best integrated graphics cards. For example, the AMD A10-7870K allows you to play most games in low detail and up to 1080p resolution. Of course, this is not a gaming card, but it outperforms all Intel HD Graphics cards, so if you want to game on a budget device, then AMD is a better choice.

CPU overclocking

Most processors have a fixed clock speed and it is set at a level that ensures that the processor will operate as stable and for a long time as possible. Users who want to get more performance overclock the processor by increasing its frequency.

AMD supports overclocking much better than Intel. You can overclock both cheap processors for $45 and more expensive ones for $100. As for Intel, here you can overclock processors of only one category - Pentium, for $70. It is well suited for this task, and from a base frequency of 3.2 GHz it can be overclocked to 4.5 GHz. AMD FX series processors with a frequency of 5 GHz support overclocking up to 13 GHz, although this requires special cooling.

In fact, budget Intel processors are not designed for overclocking, but AMD ones are quite suitable. If you want to overclock, then AMD is a great choice. There are several high-end Intel chips, with eight or ten cores. They are much faster than AMD chips. But AMD has a lot of power headroom, so they dominate overclocking. You won't find anything faster for home use.

Gaming performance

Gaming is one of the most basic areas where a powerful processor is needed. AMD has several processors that come with an integrated ATI Radeon graphics card. They offer excellent value for money. Intel also has such solutions, but if you compare Intel and AMD processors, its performance is lower.

But there is one problem, AMD processors are not as fast as Intel, and if you compare AMD vs Intel, then Intel may perform better in heavy games. Intel Core i5 and i7 will perform much better in games if you use a good external graphics card. The difference between amd and intel processors is that Intel can produce 30-40 more frames per second.

Energy efficiency

The confrontation between AMD and Intel, or more precisely, AMD's attempts to keep up with Intel is much worse than it looks. Both companies are holding up well, but the processors need to consume a lot less power. Let's try to compare intel vs amd processors.

For example, the Intel Pentium G3258 consumes 53 watts, and the A6-7400K from AMD consumes the same amount. However, in tests, Intel's chip is faster in many aspects, sometimes by a large margin. This means that the Intel chip will run faster while consuming less power, so the AMD will generate more heat and therefore produce more noise.

If the question is which processor is better amd or intel for a laptop, then energy efficiency is even more important because it directly affects battery life. Intel processors last longer, but Intel hasn't driven AMD out of the laptop market. AMD processors with integrated graphics are found on laptops over $500.

Conclusions

AMD and Intel have been battling it out for two decades, but in the last few years Intel has started to gain the upper hand. New Pentium processors have slowly replaced AMD at various price points.

If you have the budget, then Intel is obviously the best solution. This will remain true if your budget allows you to purchase an Intel Core i5. AMD can't compete with Intel on performance, at least not yet.

If your budget is small, then perhaps you should look towards AMD, here the loss in performance is compensated by an increase in the number of cores. Such processors handle some operations faster, for example, AMD encodes video faster.

If we compare Intel and Amd 2016 processors, Intel is more energy efficient and therefore produces less heat and noise. For a regular computer, these features are not so important, but for a laptop, efficiency is very important.

But all is not lost with AMD; in 2017, the company is going to release a new architecture - Zen. Based on the available information, it is very promising. If you still want to buy AMD, then you should wait for the release of Zen.

Thus, the Intel processor is better than AMD, but in some situations the latter can give excellent performance and outperform Intel. For the Linux operating system, the manufacturer of the processor does not matter much. This is exactly the component that is fully supported by the kernel. Which processor to choose AMD or Intel in 2016, in your opinion? Which is better amd or intel? Which one would you choose? Write in the comments!

To complete the video from 16 bits ago about the history of Intel vs AMD:

Let's figure out what the main differences are between the processors of the world leaders - Intel and AMD.
We will also consider their positive and negative sides.

Major CPU Manufacturers

Everyone understands perfectly well that there are two leading companies in the computing market that are engaged in the development and production of the Central Processing Unit (central processing unit), or, more simply put, processors.

These devices combine millions of transistors and other logic elements, and are electronic devices of the highest complexity.

The whole world uses computers, the heart of which is an electronic chip from either Intel or , so it’s no secret that both of these companies are constantly fighting for leadership in this area.

But let's leave these companies alone and move on to the average user, who is faced with a choice dilemma - what is preferable - Intel or AMD?

Whatever you say, there is not and cannot be a definite answer to this question, since both manufacturers have enormous potential, and their CPUs are capable of meeting the current requirements.

When choosing a processor for your device, the user primarily focuses on its performance and cost - relying on these two criteria as the main ones.

The majority of users have long been divided into two opposing camps, becoming ardent supporters of Intel or AMD products.

Let's look at all the strengths and weaknesses of the devices of these leading companies, so that when choosing a particular one, we rely not on speculation, but on specific facts and characteristics.

Advantages and disadvantages of Intel processors

So, what are the advantages of Intel processors?

First of all, this is very high performance and speed in applications and games, which are most optimized for Intel processors.
Under the control of these processors, the system operates with maximum stability.
It is worth noting that the second and third level memory of Intel CPUs operates at higher speeds than in similar processors from AMD.
Multithreading, which is implemented by Intel in CPUs such as , plays a big role in performance when working with optimized applications.

Advantages and disadvantages of AMD processors

The advantages of AMD processors include, first of all, their affordability in terms of cost, which is perfectly combined with performance.
A huge advantage is the multi-platform, which allows you to replace one processor model with another without the need to change the motherboard.
That is, a processor designed for socket AM3 can be installed on socket AM2+ without any negative consequences.
One cannot fail to note multitasking, which many AMD processors cope well with, simultaneously running three applications.
In addition, FX series processors have quite good overclocking potential, which is sometimes extremely necessary.

The disadvantages of AMD CPUs include higher power consumption than that of Intel, as well as operation of the second and third level cache memory at lower speeds.
It should also be noted that most processors belonging to the FX line require additional cooling, which will have to be purchased separately.
And another disadvantage is that fewer games and applications are adapted and written for the AMD processor than for Intel.

Current connectors from Intel

Today, many leading manufacturers of central processors are equipped with two current connectors. From Intel they are as follows:

LGA 2011 v3 is a combined connector that is aimed at quickly assembling a high-performance personal computer for both servers and the end user. The key feature of such a platform is the presence of a RAM controller that successfully operates in multi-channel mode. Thanks to this important feature, such processors provide unprecedented performance. It must be said that within the framework of such a platform an integrated subsystem is not used. Unlocking the potential of such chips is only possible with the help of discrete graphics. To do this, you should use only the best video cards;
Thanks to LGA, you can easily organize not only a high-performance computing system, but also a budget PC. For example, a socket LGA 1151 It is perfect for creating a mid-price computing station, while at the same time it will have a powerful integrated graphics core of the Intel Graphics series and support DDR4 memory.

Current AMD connectors

Today AMD is promoting the following processor sockets:

The main computing platform for such a developer is considered AM3+. The most productive CPUs are considered to be the FX model range, which includes up to eight computing modules. In addition, such a platform supports an integrated graphics subsystem. However, here the graphics core is included in the motherboard, and is not integrated into the semiconductor crystals;
the latest modern AMD processor socket – FM3+. AMD's new CPUs are intended to be used in desktop computers and media centers not only at entry-level, but also at mid-level. Thanks to this, the most modern integrated solution will be available to the average user for a fairly small amount.

Working possibilities

Many people first pay attention to the price of the processor. It is also important for them that he can easily solve the tasks assigned to him.

So, what can both organizations offer on this point? AMD is not known for outstanding achievements.

But this processor represents an excellent price-performance ratio. If you configure it correctly, you can expect stable operation without any complaints.

It is worth noting that AMD managed to implement multitasking. Thanks to such a processor, various applications can be easily launched.

With its help, you can simultaneously install the game and surf the vast expanses of the Internet.

But Intel is known for more modest results in this area, which is confirmed by the comparison of processors.

It would not be superfluous to pay attention to the availability of overclocking, during which the performance of an AMD processor can easily be increased by twenty percent compared to standard settings.

To do this, you just need to use additional software.

Intel beats AMD in almost everything except multitasking. In addition, work with Intel has always been at the highest level.

Energy consumption

Energy consumption is one of the important criteria for laptop owners. This is due to the fact that with low power consumption, the device will work longer without the need to recharge.

In addition, during such operation, a slight generation of heat occurs, which also affects the service life of the main components of the PC.

We should also say something about performance. After AMD acquired ATI, its creators were able to successfully integrate most of the graphics processing capabilities into the processor cores. Such efforts have paid off successfully.

Those who use an AMD chip for gaming should have no doubt that they are getting good performance, which is much better than the performance of equivalent chips from Intel (this is especially true for those who use a card with ATI graphics).

If it comes to heavy multitasking, then it is better to choose Intel, since it has HyperTreasing technology.

However, this advantage can only be exploited when the software application is capable of multitasking, that is, the ability to divide tasks into several small parts.

If the user needs a gaming processor, it is better to combine an AMD processor with.

So, there is a big difference between intel and amd processor sockets. When choosing the right option, consider the differences between them listed in this article. This will make choosing the right option much easier.

Main differences between processors

The difference between Intel and AMD processors lies, first of all, in the sockets - the sockets in which they are installed.

When choosing a motherboard, you must first pay attention to this fact, since it is simply impossible to find a compromise solution.