AMD vs Intel for Gaming — Bringing Clarity to a Heated Debate
AMD vs Intel is the most storied rivalry when it comes to PC processors. There’s a pretty good reason for that, as they have been the only two options for quite a while. The rivalry is so fierce that you will have diehards on either side of the fence unwilling to budge on who they think makes the best processor for gaming PCs.
While the competition may be fierce and different individuals may have strong opinions, let’s be objective about what’s better for gaming: AMD or Intel.
Before we start discussing the history of AMD and Intel or trying to tease out which is better, we need to understand the impact that choosing one over the other may have on your entire PC.
Contents
- Understanding the Trickle-down Effect
- Some Basic Terms
- AMD vs Intel – The History
-
-
-
- AMD had a rocky road until that 2017 timeframe.
-
-
-
- AMD vs Intel – Price Comparisons
-
-
-
- AMD vs Intel – Top End
- AMD vs Intel – Mid-Top
- AMD vs Intel – Middle
- AMD vs Intel – Crazy Performance
-
-
-
- The Final Verdict
-
-
-
- The consumer wins
-
-
-
Understanding the Trickle-down Effect
AMD and Intel processors directly affect which components you can use in your computer. Motherboards come in different flavors, and it comes down to either an AMD or Intel socket. Whichever one you choose, AMD or Intel, means you are stuck with that motherboard and processor combination.
The motherboard you choose can then affect which GPUs, power units, fans, cases, etc. that you can use. Even something as “universal” as RAM can become a consideration. I made this mistake when upgrading the RAM on my PC. There were two versions of G.Skill TridentZ RAM available, distinguished only by the last few letters of the model number.
To sum it up, the choice you make for your processor will follow you for the lifespan of your computer.
Some Basic Terms
Writing this section made me put down a note to write a whole article about CPUs. For this article, I will explain some key definitions.
- Cores – Each core can handle one task at a time. More cores equal more tasks being completed simultaneously.
- Threads – A thread allows a core to take on an extra task.
More threads mean more multi-tasking. - Clock speed – How many calculations the processor can make during a particular time, measured in Gigahertz (GHz).
The simplest way to understand a processor is that more cores, more threads, and a higher clock speed will equate to a faster processor.
“If the CPU is a factory, the cores and threads are the number of workers, while the clock speed is how fast they work.”
– My College Computer Science Professor
AMD vs Intel – The History
I started ripping apart and building computers when I was eleven. That was twenty years ago. Back then, the only real option was an Intel chip. That was the case for a long time. Even five years ago, when I went to a local Microcenter and bought an AMD Black Edition processor, the sales associates were giving me some side-eye over not going with Intel. The FX9590 was a very lovely CPU in 2014.
You see, AMD chips were always considered part of the budget build. If you could not afford an Intel processor, you chose AMD, because having any computer was better than having no computer. The data shows that the market became more accepting of AMD around 2017.
AMD had a rocky road until that 2017 timeframe.
If you want to understand who is bigger overall, Intel’s revenue was $70.8B in 2018, while AMD’s was $6.5B. Those numbers cover overall revenue, so Intel benefits from also being the leading manufacturer of server CPUs, but perspective is essential.
AMD vs Intel – Price Comparisons
I feel like the easiest way to figure out which is better is to look at the performance of each brand at the same price point. This comparison gives you a good idea of how far your dollar will go with each. If you have read any of my previous articles, I tend to be big on value. My general opinion is: get the most performance for your dollar.
AMD vs Intel – Top End
In general, AMD’s new line of Ryzen processors compete very favorably with Intel in head-to-head comparisons.
Let’s start by looking at the top of the line. The Intel i9-990k has a clock speed of 3.6GHz, eight cores, and 16 threads for $475. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 3900X offers a clock speed of 3.8GHz, 12 cores, 24 threads, and all for $490.
AMD vs Intel – Mid-Top
If we take one step down in performance, we start to look at the Intel i7-9700k versus the AMD Ryzen 3700X. The Intel chip brings a clock speed of 3.6GHz across eight cores and eight threads for $390. The Ryzen 3700X, on the other hand, delivers 3.6GHz clock speed across eight cores and 16 threads for $360.
AMD vs Intel – Middle
The mid-level is what I would consider the entry-level for a decent gaming computer. Yes, there are offerings with lower cost and performance, but these will get you going for a fair price. The Intel i5-9400F comes in at a reasonable 2.9GHz across six cores and six threads for around $130. The AMD Ryzen 2600X offers 3.6GHz across six cores and twelve threads for $140.
The AMD also offers overclocking, and I have personally increased the clock speed to 4.1GHz.
AMD vs Intel – Crazy Performance
To this point, I was reasonable with my classifications. The truth is, there is a level of performance that is so far and away out there that it seemed funny to try to include it in the three examples above. The Intel i9-9980XE gives you a 3GHz clock speed across 18 cores and 36 threads and comes in at around $2000. Similarly, the AMD 2990WX will provide you with 3GHz across 32 cores and 64 threads for $1700.
The Final Verdict
AMD processors tend to be better for overall computing and value. Intel processors are better for flat out gaming. Two out of two Gamezo writers agree on this fact.
The reasoning for this is AMD’s superior performance in muti-threading. As I mentioned earlier, threads allow cores to do more tasks. The fact is, games don’t run a lot of tasks. Modern videogames tend to be graphically intensive, not CPU intensive.
With a per-core performance that often meets or beats AMD, that makes Intel the clear winner for pure gaming computers.
The consumer wins
In the end, we all win. AMD has a history as a budget chip, and Intel has a history as the industry leader. With AMD pushing performance at a reasonable cost, they are challenging Intel to keep up with innovations while offering competitive pricing. That means that we should keep getting faster CPUs at a lower price. Thanks, Moore’s Law!
AMD vs. Intel: Which wins in 2022
At the heart of your pursuit for a new or upgraded PC lies an important decision: Should you use an AMD or Intel CPU? Like MacOS versus Windows, the AMD versus Intel rivalry is one of the greatest debates for PC enthusiasts, and right now we are in the middle of a neck and neck race that’s bound to get even more heated.
- Desktop processors
- Laptop processors
Which is best for you?
For much of 2020 and 2021, Intel experienced the same kind of downturn AMD experienced in the 2010s, as Team Red dominated gaming and general compute with its Ryzen 5000 chips.
But in late 2021, Intel launched its 12th-gen Alder Lake-based CPUs and suddenly tied the score. The race for CPU domination has perhaps never been this tight.
Now that 2022 is here, we’re going to look at the state of affairs for AMD and Intel.
Desktop processors
In the past, AMD CPUs were the best option in only budget and entry-level portions of the market, but that changed with AMD Ryzen 3000 and AMD Ryzen 5000. While AMD has traditionally been the best bang for buck option, this time things are different, and Intel tends to offer the best value. But that doesn’t mean Intel is losing to AMD. In fact, its Core i9-12900KS is generally regarded as the overall fastest CPU you can buy.
The most affordable AMD or Intel chips will cost between $40 and $60 for a couple of cores and energy-efficient clock speeds. The best midrange CPUs will set you back between $200 and $350, while a top gaming CPU is priced around $500. If you want to accelerate intensive tasks like video editing and transcoding, you can spend anywhere from $600 to almost $1000.
Intel and AMD have excellent processors for gaming and productivity tasks like video editing and transcoding. Neither Intel nor AMD have a single CPU that is the best at both things, however. Intel’s Core i9-12900KS is great for productivity and gaming, beating the Ryzen 9 5950X in both categories, but AMD’s gaming-focused Ryzen 7 5800X3D is much faster in games.
You don’t need to buy the best to get a hrefgreat CPU for gaming or work, though. At around the $250-300 mark, Intel’s Core i5-12600K is certainly the CPU to buy. It’s fast in games and productivity, even beating out AMD’s Ryzen 5 5600X, which was our previous favorite for the midrange.
Intel has also been releasing many budget-level CPUs in the $100-200 range, such as the Core i5-12400 and Core i3-12100. It was actually quite easy for Intel to dominate this segment with its new 12th-gen CPUs because AMD had been seriously neglecting the budget segment. AMD finally updated its budget offerings in April with CPUs such as the Ryzen 5 4500 and Ryzen 5 5500, but these CPUs have not been received very favorably because of their price and also because the 4500 is based on the much older Zen 2 architecture.
If you’re planning on building a cheap system with no discrete graphics, Intel is practically your only option. AMD’s modern Ryzen 5000 APU lineup starts with the Ryzen 5 5600G, which is almost $200. While Intel’s integrated graphics are usually slower than AMD’s, the Core i3-12100 with integrated graphics is cheap, fast enough, and pairs well with a future midrange GPU.
Meanwhile, Intel is preparing its 13th-gen CPUs based on Raptor Lake, which at the moment seem like more powerful versions of Alder Lake. Intel hasn’t talked much about architectural improvements, but it has said Raptor Lake won’t be on a new process, which means the new CPU probably won’t be quite as radical of an improvement as Ryzen 7000 could be.
High-end desktop
If you want to use your PC for heavy video editing at high resolutions, perform intensive video transcoding, or perform any other intensive task that can benefit from even more power than the best mainstream CPUs can offer, then high-end desktop, or HEDT CPUs, could be what you need.
AMD and Intel have options in this space, with higher core and thread counts. AMD’s options remain the most capable and cost-effective, however.
Intel’s HEDT line reaches up to 18 cores and 36 threads with the 10980XE, but even if you can find it in stock, you’ll pay its suggested retail price of $980 despite it being nearly three years old. Although the 10980XE is several generations old now, it’s still a powerful CPU, but it’s hard to recommend when you consider AMD’s alternatives.
AMD’s 5950X mainstream CPU already offers credible competition for the 10980XE at under $800, so it offers far better value for money. But if you want extra performance, the sky’s the limit.
AMD’s third-gen Threadripper CPUs offer 24, 32, and even 64 cores with support for double that number of simultaneous threads, all while maintaining clock speeds around the 4GHz mark. If your software can make use of all those extra cores, AMD’s Threadripper CPUs offer unparalleled performance outside of obscenely expensive server CPUs, easily outstripping the Intel competition.
They also support a greater number of PCIExpress lanes — 64 versus just 44 on the Intel alternatives — making them more suited to larger storage arrays.
Normally, you’d be able to buy the 3960X, 3970X, and 3990X for $1,400, $1,850, and $3,600, respectively. However, on retailers like Amazon and Newegg, they’re selling for hundreds or even thousands of dollars more than that.
What about Threadripper 5000? Well, those never launched as standalone CPUs. Rather, you can only find them in the Lenovo ThinkStation P620, and these are the Pro WX versions. Professional-grade hardware tends to cost quite a bit more than the consumer stuff. So, if you wanted to build your own HEDT, your options aren’t great: Affordable but ancient Intel CPUs on one hand, modern but insanely expensive AMD CPUs in prebuilts on the other.
Laptop processors
The laptop market is a different story. Most notebooks you’ll find are based on an Intel processor of various generations and integrated graphics.
As a Dell representative once indicated, Intel’s portfolio is simply huge compared to AMD, and its current lineup of laptops and the CPUs inside them are better than ever.
Intel’s laptop CPUs, just like its desktop CPUs, are powered by Alder Lake, and you should be able to find laptops equipped with 12th Gen CPUs in pretty much every segment. Alder Lake comes in four flavors: the low power U models, the middle power P models, and the high power H and HX models. Generally speaking, the more power, the faster the CPU, but there are some H and HX CPUs with fewer cores than P CPUs, so performance will depend on more than just power.
Generally speaking, you’ll find U- and P-type CPUs in lighter, thinner laptops with a focus on good battery life, decent integrated graphics, and overall satisfactory performance. H and HX CPUs are primarily for gaming laptops and they’ll usually be paired with a powerful AMD or Nvidia GPU (and soon, Intel GPUs).
AMD has recently launched its Ryzen 6000 CPUs, and while they are good, they’re limited to competing in the low end and midrange.
In its review of the Ryzen 6000 equipped Asus ROG Zephyrus G14, Techspot found that while Ryzen 6000 could certainly go head to head with lower power 12th-gen CPUs, it couldn’t keep up with more powerful CPUs like the Core i7-12700H. It’s even worse for AMD when you consider that the 12700H isn’t even Intel’s fastest mobile CPU. AMD’s biggest issue is that its fastest laptop CPUs only offer 8 cores, while Intel’s fastest has 16.
Ryzen mobile CPUs come in different flavors just like Intel’s:
- C — Low power
- U — Efficient performance
- HS — Efficient high performance
- H/HX — Highest performance
AMD uses basically the same naming scheme as Intel, allowing options in thin and light notebooks and high-end gaming laptops alike. The current generation is Ryzen 6000, but you may find Ryzen 5000 CPUs in laptops, too. They’re both based around the same architecture, so although Ryzen 6000 offers performance improvements, they aren’t massive.
Both AMD and Intel offer credible performance for work and play, and there are many more considerations to make when buying a laptop than the CPU, so looking at individual model reviews is a must. That’s especially important in 2022, as Intel tries to resecure its traditional position in the market against AMD, which is vying for more market share.
Which is best for you?
For everyday web browsing, watching Netflix, and answering emails, Intel and AMD CPUs will give you excellent performance right out of the box. There are certain tasks, though, where one company’s options perform better than the others.
If you’re looking to work with your processor performing intensive multithreaded tasks like video editing or transcoding, or heavy multitasking activities with tens of browser tabs open, Intel is the best option, especially for laptops. On the desktop, AMD isn’t far behind.
If you’re buying a laptop, both Intel and AMD are good options until you get to high-power and high-performance laptops.
Intel has 16 core CPUs and AMD can only muster 8 core CPUs, so it’s not that AMD is bad for the high end, they simply don’t exist there at the moment.
The good news is that there really isn’t a bad choice in a CPU market — AMD and Intel are both operating at full tilt, so the AMD vs. Intel comparison won’t stop anytime soon. Your best choice is to pick the processor that’s cheaper, available, and works with the components you already have.
Source:https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-vs-intel/ Date: 05.06.2022.
AMD vs. Intel: Whose Processors Are the Best? » 24Gadget.Ru :: Gadgets and technologies
-
The launch of a fusion reactor was postponed for 8 years
It became known about the suspension of the development of one of the most ambitious projects of our time — the launch of the International Experimental Thermonuclear Reactor (ITER). Due to sudden problems, the launch of the reactor was postponed until the 2030s.
Read more
-
nine0004 Walkman NW-A306 — SONY new portable music player based on Android
Sony has introduced a new portable audio player Walkman NW-A306. It runs on the Android operating system. The novelty is a cheaper alternative to the NW-ZX707, but smaller and much lighter.
Read more
-
Using WiFi, scientists have learned to see people through walls
Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have developed a method to create a digital three-dimensional model of the human body and its movements in a room using Wi-Fi routers alone. In other words, with just Wi-Fi signals, you can literally follow people through walls.
nine0007
Read more -
Samsung showed the Galaxy Z Fold 5, but no one noticed it
According to the South Korean edition of Naver, Samsung showed a prototype of the Galaxy Z Fold 5 at CES 2023, but almost no one noticed it.
Read more
-
MSI Pen 2 — stylus for touch screens and pencil for paper at the same time (2 photos + video)
MSI has announced an unusual device — Pen 2. Its unique feature is dual use — it can be used both on paper and on the screen of a touch laptop. According to company representatives, the device uses MPP2.6 technology with 4096 pressure levels. Its autonomy is an impressive 10 hours on a five-minute charge…
Read more
January 12, 2021 | —
Vkontakte
Odnoklassniki
One of the «eternal» topics of computer disputes is to determine the best manufacturer of processors. Two companies claim to be the traditional leader: Intel and AMD. However, it is unlikely that you will be able to get an exact answer to this question. It all depends on what exactly you need a computer for and what budget you have. Each option has certain features, but in general, both manufacturers overtake each other in one way or another.
nine0007
Which is better?
So, it’s not about the processor, but about the person. AMD is a good choice for entry-level and mid-level users, while Intel makes the best premium chips for professional users. For decades, Intel dominated AMD and was considered the leader in the processor market. That all changed, however, when Advanced Micro Devices introduced the Ryzen 7 series to compete with Intel’s Core i7 offerings. Since then, manufacturers have been fighting almost on equal terms, but the differences between them still remain. nine0007
AMD processors are great at multitasking, while Intel chips are better suited for single-threaded tasks. Several cores are simultaneously involved in various processes, including photo and video editing programs, 3D modeling and rendering, games with «heavy» graphics. If a person only needs to use general applications, they will see better performance from AMD chips.
The number of AMD and Intel cores at the entry level is almost the same.
Both the Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 models offer four cores each. It’s the same with high-end desktop models. Ryzen Threadripper models offer 8, 12, and 16 physical cores, while Intel i9 modelsoffer 10 to 18 physical cores.
Intel
If you need a high-performance computer for complex tasks, Intel-based processors should be preferred. However, the differences become significant for mid-range and high-end CPUs. The models of the lower price segment have almost the same performance characteristics. AMD has decent powerful competitors, but they use more power.
AMD
The company’s chips are cheaper than the competition, so they’re better suited for budget-minded customers. Another advantage is that overclocking is available (if the motherboard supports this feature). In contrast, Intel chips are only capable of overclocking if they have a «K» at the end of the model number. As a rule, they cost more than others. nine0007
advertisement
JavaScript is disabled in your browser.
For correct operation of the site is highly recommended to enable it.
AMD versus Intel: multi-year processor war
Text Pavel Ievlev
How did it happen that all the processors in the world belong to just two companies? And why is the duopoly coming to an end? Understanding the history and prospects of the CPU
Competition Intel and AMD were at one time
a very popular topic, but now you don’t hear about it. By capitalization, volumes
sales and market presence of Intel processors has long surpassed the competitor, and AMD Ryzen is present in
your desktop or laptop is much less likely than Intel Core .
But why isn’t there a processor from some third manufacturer?
General Line
Desktop and (so far) most laptop processors
systems can be produced Intel or AMD , but in fact they are the same
CPU. More precisely, these are CPUs having the same architecture.
It’s called
nostalgically — x86 , for a series of processors Intel 80386 , released back in 1985. This series created
the home PC market and it also determined its software and hardware vector of development,
as a result of which on our tables / knees stands / lies just such
device and not something else entirely.
The general line of computer engineering has repeatedly tried
turn off the beaten path, but two circumstances kept her on the trajectory: continuity
software and architecture license. nine0007
Continuity in software development is a very important factor. Big
part of the programs that we use are developing consistently and have
many years of history. But software is written for hardware, and hardware supports software, and this
a vicious circle of backward compatibility, from which it is very difficult to jump out.
This is partly why even the latest versions of Windows support running old 32-bit programs, and on
a modern computer can put programs written in the 80s
last century (not all, but many).
If you create a completely new computer, not
having continuity with the entire historical line of PCs, it turns out that under
it is necessary to write analogues of millions of programs that are already used by people. nine0007
A task that looked impossible but was solved.
However, more on that later, but for now let’s talk about architecture.
Architectural monopoly
Those computers that we have came up with Intel . More precisely, this company came up with
processor architecture, which has become a universal standard and, of course,
patented it. Architecture x86 is a bundle
processor and its instruction set.
Processors x86
use a complex set of instructions ( ISA — Instruction Set Architecture ),
which is called CISC — Complex Instruction Set Computing . «Complicated» in this
case, a technical term meaning an approach to programming. it
historically established structure — the first programs were written literally by machine
code, zeros and ones (holes and their absence on punched cards and
punched tapes), then a low-level language 9 appeared0072 Assembler which itself
translated simple commands into zeros and ones, then complex commands appeared
instructions that combine such commands into blocks, which made it possible to switch to
high-level programming languages that are understandable not only to the machine, but also
to a person.
The set of such complex instructions for x86- processors was called CISC — Complex Instruction Set Computing .
It is on them that all programs that run on a PC are ultimately based,
because the purpose of the program is to set the sequence of actions for the processor,
which will do the calculations. Any program should refer to
processor so that he understands it. This means that all PC programs are written under
one processor — x86 .
License for architecture x86 belongs to
Intel , and the company is completely satisfied with this. AMD literally gnawed out for itself
exception in American courts, having fought for over a decade in the 1980s and 1990s
years, and more people who want something are not visible. Therefore, manufacturers of equipment use
processors Intel or AMD — ready solutions without
the ability to flexibly modify chips for your specific product.
The exception was at one time company Apple
— from 1994 to 2006 they put their own chips PowerPC into their products, but
then the economy won — the Yabloko switched to Intel ,
and rewrote macOS and their software under x86 , abandoning compatibility. Go —
they crossed, but they held a grudge.
And we will also return to this later.
Advent
ARM
It seemed that technological continuity and reverse
compatibility — two nails with which the market is nailed to x86- architecture
forever. No one will make a processor with a different set of instructions, because
there is no software for it, and no one will make other software, because there is no software for it
processors. And we would have walked in this circle, but phones changed everything,
become computers.
Mobility has not been linked to the entire software history since
60s, operating systems and programs for them were written from scratch (well, almost), they did not
backwards compatibility was needed, and therefore they were not doomed to CISC . Moreover, the processors x86
turned out to be too big, gluttonous and hot for mobile solutions,
and their power is redundant. It took something easier and simpler, and into the light
ARM- processor was born.
ARM- processors
Machines ) on the contrary use a simplified set of instructions — RISC ( Reduced Instruction Set Computing ). Explanations
differences between CISC and RISC would take up too much space
and would require too deep immersion in a highly specialized niche
programming. We confine ourselves to stating a fact — due to these differences, in the RISC- architecture
easier memory handling, easier optimization, easier scaling, smaller
Energy consumption. Processors x86 and ARM have one
generations, energy consumption differs in favor of ARM is an order of magnitude! That is why we
we can afford to carry in our pocket and charge less than once a day,
a computer that is not inferior in computing power to a noisy gluttonous box
on the table.
True, you cannot run the same programs on it. Although…
Apple strikes back
The market split along a natural boundary – mobile solutions
all ARM , laptops and desktops — all x86 .
But
soon the first footbridges were thrown across this watershed — ARM- laptops.
Why not? There is enough power, enough software is written. At first it was rather
tablets with a keyboard, weak and working with adapted mobile software,
but gradually this niche began to be filled with quite adequate proposals.
And then in Apple remembered how they
caved in, and struck back — in 2020 after almost 15 years of production
computers with Intel processors, the company announced the transition to processors
ARM of our own design. nine0007
Apple can afford — desktop
processors M1 «grew» from the mobile chips of the Ax series, Apple has a lot of experience
development of operating systems and software and an ultra-loyal audience that will forgive
«Yabloko» another transition without backward compatibility. Moreover, has Apple
has its own programming language Swift , which has long been unified
software development process for iOS and OS X .
(For software that under ARM adapt
not yet, Apple uses the built-in emulator Rosetta 2 .)
Will
win over ARM ?
Most notebook and computer manufacturers are not yet
go to ARM — does not allow huge luggage
popular software and the mass character of technology. Not everyone can afford to be Apple . But ARM has
big advantage — company ARM Limited does not manufacture processors itself, but
sells licenses to anyone. Each manufacturer may not buy ready-made
the solution is Intel or AMD , but order a chip «for yourself».
Huawei makes its mobile chips Kirin , Samsung — Exynos , Apple — Ax and M1,
manufactured by TSMC . The same list includes Qualcomm , MediaTek , NVIDIA and others
companies. And also their processors for ARM does,
e.g. is Fujitsu and is Lenovo
releases its laptops on ARM- processors that run on Windows and support most of the familiar Windows software.