which type of processor should you go for?
Intel and AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) are two of the biggest names in technology, responsible for the chips that power millions of computers, graphics cards, servers and other devices. So what are the differences between these two giants of the industry?
Here we’ll lay out how Intel and AMD match up against each other in all the key areas – and which one you might want to trust with your next hardware purchase.
- Best laptop: All the top notebooks, 2-in-1s and ultraportables to buy today
- How to build and upgrade your own gaming PC
Intel vs AMD: the basics
Intel
Intel has been around since 1968, growing to become the biggest semiconductor chip maker at one point (it’s now second, behind Samsung). Thanks to the phenomenal success of its x86 architecture chips, Intel components can be found in most computers, whether they’re running Windows or macOS.
AMD isn’t anywhere near as big as Intel, but it’s still Intel’s biggest competitor in the x86 market – the laptops and desktops we all use every day. AMD continues to battle Intel for market share in consumer computer processors, and since the acquisition of ATI in 2006, also competes with Nvidia for the graphics card and chipsets market, too.
When people want to know about Intel vs AMD, they usually want to know about how their desktop processors compare, but broad generalisations are difficult – each firm makes so many CPUs, you really need to match up specific models against each other.
In general, AMD is known for better value, while Intel offers better performance, but this is by no means a hard and fast rule – and the balance tends to tip through the months and years as each company comes out with new components.
Most recently, AMD has generated quite a spike in popularity thanks to outperforming Intel with their Ryzen 7 and 9 series CPUs, which by all traditional metrics, best Intel’s equal offering within the i7 or i9 line.
Computer hardware site WePC ran several tests with comparable processors from each, ultimately testifying: “AMD’s Ryzen 7 CPUs clearly outperform the comparative i7 series from Intel”.
Just taking a look at the CPU benchmarking website Geekbench (where higher numbers equate to better performance), Intel’s Core i9-10900K clocks in at a 1,396 single-core score and 10,839 in multi-core. AMD’s Ryzen 9 5900X, however, sees much better single-core scores at 1,671 and 14,110 for multi-core.
It isn’t to say Intel lags leagues behind in a way that’ll be detrimental to your PC or gaming experience, but the latest benchmarks confirming AMD’s pound-for-pound supremacy don’t lie.
SQUIRREL_6133995
Intel vs AMD: the processors
AMD
Intel’s newest line of CPUs are the 11th-generation chips codenamed Rocket Lake. As has been the case for a number of years, you can pick from i3, i5, i7, and i9 processors inside your desktop or laptop, with performance and price increases as you go up that list.
Over on the AMD side, the company’s top-end processors at the moment are the fourth-generation Ryzen set, following on from the excellent original Ryzen family that launched in 2016.
As with Intel, you’ve got a choice of different performance levels for both laptop and desktop: from cheapest and least powerful to most expensive and top end, there’s the Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 7, and Ryzen 9.
Which is best? It really depends what you want from your computer system and how much money you’re willing to spend: AMD’s chips typically offer more cores and more threads, whereas Intel chips have the higher clock speeds. On top of that, the two companies also take different architecture approaches to integrated graphics – which may or may not be a concern depending on whether you’re installing a separate graphics card.
If money is no issue, then consider the fact that AMD’s $4,000 / £3,500+ Threadripper 3990X CPU packs an astonishing 64 cores, making it far and away the most powerful processor ever recorded on Geekbench, with multi-core scores easily topping 25,000.
When comparing more realistic and popular options, Intel’s $350 / £300 Core i7-11700K clocks in a 9,840 multi-core score, whereas the equally priced AMD Ryzen 7 5800X tops 10,200.
Intel
As a result of its acquisition of ATI, AMD has a host of graphics cards in its line-up as well, an area which Intel isn’t directly involved in (though it does develop integrated graphics chips as part of its processor units). In terms of market share, AMD is playing second fiddle here too, this time to Nvidia – but it still has plenty to offer.
One area where AMD does undeniably dominate the market is in gaming consoles – custom AMD chips power both the Sony PlayStation and Xbox Series X/S lines, whereas Intel doesn’t get a look in. There’s no question of having to choose between Intel and AMD here.
Intel does dabble in more experimental projects than AMD: it’s tried its hand at wearables, drones, self-driving systems and all kinds of other tech, which of course it can afford to do given its gargantuan size.
In some ways these are two very different companies, but in the most important area – desktop and laptop processors – they’re more closely tied than they have been for years.
You can buy from both manufacturers with confidence, but look up processor benchmarks on the web and compare prices for a full picture.
Now why not check out The best Windows 10 apps to download or try right now
A Detailed Comparison For 2023
At the heart of every computer lies a tiny yet mighty central processing unit, or CPU. It’s the brain of the machine, responsible for executing every command, calculating complex mathematical equations, and carrying out countless other tasks that make our digital lives possible.
But its importance goes far beyond just powering our personal devices, as the performance of the CPU can have a profound impact on everything.
When it comes to choosing a processor for your computer, two of the most prominent names that come to mind are AMD and Intel. Both have been at the forefront of the computer industry for decades, constantly pushing the boundaries of computing power and efficiency.
However, their approaches to processing technology and target markets differ greatly, leading to a never-ending debate among tech enthusiasts on the best choice.
Whether you’re a gamer looking for the ultimate gaming experience or a professional who needs a powerful and reliable workstation, the decision between AMD and Intel can greatly impact your computing experience.
With advancements in technology constantly pushing the limits of what a CPU can do, choosing the right one has become increasingly crucial in determining the overall performance of a computer. From high-speed gaming to heavy-duty content creation, the CPU is the key to unlocking the full potential of your machine.
After extensive research and experience, we have compiled a detailed guide about AMD vs. Intel processors.
Why AMD and Intel Processors Lead
AMD and Intel are the two heavyweights in the world of computer processors, leading the charge regarding innovation, performance, and market share. These two companies have dominated the industry for decades, each bringing unique strengths and approaches to processing technology.
Whether it’s their cutting-edge architectures, advanced manufacturing processes, or deep investments in research and development, AMD and Intel continue to set the bar for what is possible in the world of computing.
But what sets them apart from the competition and makes them the leaders in their field?
AMD has built a strong reputation for delivering high-performance processors that cater to the needs of gamers and content creators. Additionally, AMD processors offer excellent value for money, offering performance that rivals Intel’s high-end offerings at a more affordable price point.
On the other hand, Intel has a long history of delivering top-performing processors favored by professionals and demanding users. The company’s Core processors are known for their high clock speeds, which make them ideal for tasks that require a lot of single-threaded performance, such as gaming.
AMD Processors VS. Intel Processors: A Detailed Comparison
The race for supremacy in the processor world has been ongoing for decades, with AMD and Intel consistently pushing each other to new heights.
However, there are various aspects to consider when comparing both the top-end processors in detail.
Below is our take on the factors that play a significant part in the overall performance. Let’s check it out.
Productivity And Content Creation
When it comes to productivity, multimedia usage, and content creation, more cores are required for a better and uninterrupted experience.
AMD processors have made great strides in recent years and offer competitive performance for tasks such as office applications, web browsing, video editing, and video conferencing.
For video editing, encoding both audio and video simultaneously can be quite demanding. If a single core handles both components, it has to continuously alternate between them, resulting in a slower export process.
Here is a performance comparison of some Intel and AMD processors with single-thread:Intel VS. AMD single thread performance comparison. Source: Tom’s Hardware
However, by distributing the workload among several cores and threads, the challenging task of rendering a 3D model can be accomplished much more efficiently.
That said, the high core count of many AMD processors makes them well-suited for multithreaded tasks, leading to faster completion times for demanding work such as data analysis, video rendering, and software development.
Because of this, AMD is well-known for rolling out the most energy-efficient CPUs. The latest generation of chips prevents the CPU from overheating even under extensive load.
Intel, on the other hand, is known for its single-core performance. The older Intel processors were unable to compete with AMD processors in terms of video rendering and other multimedia tasks because of the absence of multi-cores.
However, Intel processors have significantly improved in their ability to handle multi-tasking and video rendering with single-core performance, largely through advanced technologies such as Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost.
Hyper-Threading allows each core to handle two threads simultaneously, doubling the number of threads the processor can handle simultaneously.
This can help to boost performance and reduce wait times when running multiple applications simultaneously, such as web browsing, email, and office applications.
Turbo Boost technology allows the processor to automatically increase its frequency and performance when needed, ensuring that you have the power you need when you need it. This can be especially beneficial for video rendering, where the processor may need to handle heavy workloads for extended periods of time.
By automatically boosting its performance, the processor can complete these tasks faster, allowing you to get back to your work sooner. That said, Intel processors are now designed to deliver high performance for both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks.
Gaming
AMD and Intel processors both have their own strengths and weaknesses when it comes to gaming. Intel processors have traditionally been the go-to choice for gamers due to their high clock speeds, which allow for more fluid gameplay and lower input lag.
However, recent advancements made by AMD in their Ryzen line of processors have narrowed the gap between the two brands, making it more of a toss-up as to which is the better choice for gaming.
In terms of raw processing power, AMD Ryzen processors tend to have more cores and threads than their Intel counterparts, allowing for better multitasking and better performance in multi-threaded games. Additionally, AMD processors are generally more affordable than Intel processors, making them a better choice for budget-conscious gamers.
On the other hand, Intel processors have a more refined architecture, which allows them to reach higher clock speeds and provide better performance in single-threaded games.
Another factor to consider when choosing a processor for gaming is the integrated graphics card. Both Intel and AMD processors have integrated graphics options, but AMD’s integrated graphics cards are typically stronger and can handle demanding games at lower resolutions.
Intel’s integrated graphics options are more suitable for less demanding games or games played at lower resolutions.
Ultimately, the choice between an AMD and Intel processor for gaming will come down to personal preference, budget, and what type of games you play.
If you’re a gamer who plays a mix of demanding and less demanding games, an AMD processor might be the better choice for its strong multi-threading capabilities and budget-friendly price. If you’re more interested in high-speed gaming with low input lag, an Intel processor might be better for its higher clock speeds and refined architecture.
Here is a comparison between AMD and Intel processors in terms of gaming performance:Intel VS. AMD gaming FPS comparison. Source: Tom’s Hardware
Faster Performance
The race for faster performance in the world of computer processors is a hotly contested one, with AMD and Intel being the two main players. It’s a bit like the classic battle between a sprinter and a marathon runner – both can run fast, but in different ways.
AMD processors are like marathon runners, excelling at multi-tasking and handling many tasks simultaneously. Whereas Intel processors are like sprinters, delivering lightning-fast performance for individual tasks.
One major difference between the two companies is the architecture of their processors. AMD processors are built using the Zen architecture, which is optimized for multi-threading and high core counts. This means that AMD processors can handle more tasks simultaneously, making them well-suited for demanding applications like video editing and gaming.
However, Intel processors are built using the Core architecture, designed for high clock speeds and single-threaded performance. This makes Intel processors better suited for tasks that require fast processing of individual tasks, such as video rendering.
Another key difference between AMD and Intel processors is the manufacturing process. AMD processors are typically manufactured using a 7nm process, which allows for smaller transistors and higher performance.
Intel processors, on the other hand, are typically manufactured using a 10nm or 14nm process, which results in higher power consumption and lower performance.
Finally, the pricing of AMD and Intel processors also affects their performance. AMD processors tend to be more affordable, which makes them an attractive option for budget-conscious consumers. On the other hand, Intel processors are often more expensive and are targeted toward high-end users who require the highest levels of performance.
In conclusion, both AMD and Intel processors offer different advantages in terms of performance. The best choice between the two will depend on the specific needs and budget of the user.
Cooler Operation
It’s not possible to definitively say that one brand is consistently cooler than the other, as thermal performance can vary between different models and generations of processors from both Intel and AMD.
However, in general, AMD processors have been known to have a slight advantage in thermal performance due to their architecture and design choices.
For example, AMD processors often have more cores and threads, which can distribute heat more evenly across the chip. Additionally, AMD processors have a more efficient power management system, which can reduce heat generation.
Intel processors, on the other hand, have been known to prioritize performance over efficiency, which can result in higher heat generation. Intel also uses a finer manufacturing process, which can lead to higher clock speeds and more transistors in a smaller area, but also results in closer proximity of transistors and more heat generation.
Ultimately, the thermal performance of a processor depends on many factors, including the specific model and generation, the cooling solution used, and the workload being run on the processor. It is important to consider these factors and evaluate the thermal performance of a specific processor before making a decision.
Price Point
The price difference between AMD and Intel processors is an important consideration for consumers when choosing between the two brands.
In general, AMD processors are known for being more affordable than comparable Intel processors, making them a popular choice for budget-conscious consumers.
However, it’s important to note that the exact price difference between the two brands can vary depending on several factors.
One of the most significant factors is the specific model and generation of the processor and the features and performance it offers. High-end processors from both brands can be significantly more expensive, while entry-level and mid-range processors may have a smaller price difference.
Another factor that can impact the price difference between AMD and Intel processors is competition in the market. In recent years, AMD has increased its competitiveness in the market by offering processors with similar performance to Intel processors at a lower price point.
This has put downward pressure on Intel’s pricing and has made it more difficult for Intel to maintain its premium pricing.
Comparison Table
The comparison chart below gives an overall idea of the major differences between AMD and Intel CPU processors.
Now that you have an in-depth knowledge of the aspects where either of the processors leads, this table will help you make a better choice.
| Features | AMD | Intel |
| Efficiency | Greater than Intel | Lesser than AMD |
| Clock Speed | Up to 5.0 GHz which can result in overheating | Up to 5.0 GHz and beyond without overheating |
| IPC (Instructions Per Cycle/Clock) | AMD IPC Zen 3 is higher as compared to the Intel Rocket Lake | Intel Rocket Lake in comparison to the AMD Zen 3 is lower |
| iGPU (Integrated Graphics Processing Unit) | Only available in AMD APU series with higher GPU performance than the Intel iGPU | Integrated into every Core I series (except Core I F-series) |
| SMP (Symmetric Multiprocessing) | Up to 8 sockets/128 cores. |
Up to 4 sockets/28 cores. |
| Hot/cool operation | Doesn’t heat up because of smaller lithography (TSMC 7nm is identical to Intel 10 nm) | Only heats up during Clock Speed Boost mode (14 nm) |
| Most Successful/Popular Processors | Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 7, Ryzen 9 and Threadripper | Core i3, i5, i7, and i9 |
| Price | Higher-range models are less expensive than Intel | Lower-range models are less pricey than AMD |
Intel VS. AMD processor comparison
Intel Equivalent AMD Processors Comparison
There are a couple of models from Intel and AMD that we found equivalent to each other in terms of performance. Following are the top comparisons best fit with each other.
Intel Core i5 VS. AMD Ryzen 5
Intel Core i5 vs AMD Ryzen 5
The Intel Core i5-12400 and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X are both mid-range processors aimed at providing good performance at an affordable price.
They both have 6 cores and 12 threads, meaning they can handle multi-tasking and demanding applications efficiently. Additionally, both processors have similar power consumption, with a TDP of 65W, making them suitable for use in various system builds.
Both the i5-12400 and the Ryzen 5 5600X also offer good gaming performance, with the Ryzen 5 5600X having a slight advantage due to its higher clock speeds. They also support high-speed memory, allowing fast data access and improving overall system performance.
However, some key differences in their technical specifications. For instance, the Ryzen 5 5600X comes with a larger L3 cache, at 32 MB, compared to the i5-12400’s 18 MB.
Furthermore, speaking of the base clocking speed, the Intel Core i5-12400 features 2.5 GHz and a maximum turbo frequency of 4.4 GHz. While the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X has a base clock speed of 3.7 GHz and a maximum boost frequency of 4.6 GHz.
Generally, Intel Core i5 processors tend to be slightly more expensive than AMD Ryzen 5 processors, but this can vary greatly based on the specific models being compared.
However, for the model we discussed, the Intel Core i5-12400 is priced at $171, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is available at $190.
Intel Core i7 VS. AMD Ryzen 7
Intel Core i7 vs AMD Ryzen 7
Very high-performing processors, the Intel Core i7-7700K and the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X are toe-to-toe competitors. Both were released in the first quarter of 2017. The Intel i7-7700K has 4 cores and 8 threads, whereas the Ryzen 7 1800K comes with 8 cores and 16 threads.
Considering the cores and threads, these processors can efficiently multi-tasking and handle multiple processes simultaneously.
Additionally, both processors support high-speed memory, providing fast data access and improved overall system performance. Although the i7-7700K has a higher clock speed, i.e., 4.2 GHz, the Ryzen 7 1800X has a higher core count and larger cache, i.e., 16MB, making it better suited for multi-threaded workloads. Intel, however, has 8MB of L3 cache.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a TDP of around 90W, making them suitable for use in the high-performance system builds.
However, it’s worth noting that the Ryzen 7 1800X has a slightly higher TDP, i.e., 95W, which may generate slightly more heat and require better cooling.
The Intel Core i7-7700K has a base clock speed of 4.2 GHz and a maximum turbo frequency of 5 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X has a base clock speed of 3.95 GHz and a maximum boost frequency of 4.0 GHz.
In conclusion, the i7-7700K and Ryzen 7 1800X offer excellent performance but different strengths. Intel is better suited for gaming and single-threaded tasks, while AMD is suitable for multi-threaded workloads.
For the price point, the Intel core i7-7700K comes as an expensive choice here with a price tag of $375. On the other side, AMD Ryzen 7 1800X is slightly less expensive than Intel at $295.
To understand the comparison between the Intel Core i7-13700K and AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, here is a detailed video:
Intel Core i9 VS. AMD Ryzen 9
Intel Core i9 vs AMD Ryzen 9
Being the latest versions, both processors are extremely top-notch and designed to fulfill exceptionally demanding tasks.
If you are a professional gamer, content creator, or graphics designer, these processors are powerhouses that can cater to your demanding needs.
On one hand, the i9-9900K is an octa-core processor with 16 threads, while on the other hand, the Ryzen 9 3900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, providing ample processing power for heavy multitasking and demanding workloads.
For clock speeds, the i9-9900K has a base clock speed of 3.6 GHz and a maximum turbo frequency of 5.2 GHz, while the Ryzen 9 3900X has a base clock speed of 3.8 GHz and a maximum turbo frequency of 4.25 GHz. The Ryzen 9 3900X also has a larger L3 cache, which can improve overall system performance, especially in heavy workloads.
Both processors also support high-speed memory. The Intel is likely to consume 95W TDP and hence is suitable for high-performance builds. However, AMD takes up around 105W TDP therefore; it heats up a bit quicker than Intel.
Intel Core i9-9900K is priced pretty high at $595, whereas the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is relatively affordable at $375.
All in all, Intel and AMD are capable processors, offering strong performance for heavy applications and extensive gaming.
Key Considerations Before Buying An AMD or Intel Processor
Before purchasing an AMD or Intel processor, there are several key considerations to keep in mind:
Purpose
Consider what you will be using the processor for. Will it be for gaming, content creation, or general-purpose computing? Different processors may be better suited to different tasks, so it’s important to consider your specific needs.
Budget
The cost of processors can vary greatly, so it’s important to consider your budget and what features you can afford. Typically, Intel is known for having quite expensive newer models and AMD has rolled out the latest versions at a fairly pocket-friendly price point.
Number of Cores
It is an important consideration for multi-threaded tasks, such as content creation and heavy multitasking. More cores can lead to better performance, which usually means a higher price tag.
Here is a list of core counts based on the purpose.
- Basic computing and daily tasks: 4 cores
- Productivity tasks (office work, video conferencing): 4 to 8 cores
- Gaming: 4 to 6 cores
- Content creation (video editing, graphic design): 6 to 12 cores
- High-performance computing (scientific simulations, rendering): 8 to 32+ cores
Keep in mind that core count is just one factor that affects performance, and other factors such as clock speed and memory also play a significant role. Additionally, the specific software and workloads you plan to run will also affect the ideal number of cores.
Clock Speed
Typically measured in GHz, clocking speed refers to the speed at which the processor operates. Higher clock speeds can lead to better performance but also generate more heat.
The optimal clock speed for a particular use case will depend on several factors, including the intended use of the computer, the type of software that will be run, and the user’s budget.
- For general use and light tasks, a clock speed of 2-3 GHz is usually sufficient.
- For gaming and demanding software, a clock speed of 3-4 GHz or higher is recommended.
- For high-end applications, such as video editing and 3D rendering, a clock speed of 4 GHz or higher is best suggested, along with a high-end GPU.
It’s also important to note that other components, such as the amount of RAM and the type of storage, can also impact the overall performance of a computer, so it’s best to consider a combination of these factors when choosing a processor.
Here is a comparison chart for AMD VS. Intel CPU overclocking performance:
Intel VS AMD Overclocking comparison. Source: Tom’s Hardware
Cache
Cache is a type of memory built into the processor to store frequently used data. More cache can lead to improved performance, especially in demanding applications. Below we have mentioned minimum cache requirements based on the nature of use:
- General and light tasks: 4 to 8 MB
- Gaming and software usage: 8 to 16 MB
- Heavy applications, video editing, and 3D rendering: 16 MB or higher
Integrated Graphics
An integrated graphics card, also known as an integrated GPU, is a compact and budget-friendly graphics processing solution built directly into a computer’s CPU.
It allows for a more streamlined and cost-effective setup, eliminating the need for a separate, dedicated graphics card.
An integrated GPU shares the system’s memory with other components and utilizes it to display and process images, videos, and animations on the computer screen. It’s responsible for handling tasks such as desktop graphics, video playback, and even casual gaming, making it a convenient and integrated solution for basic graphical needs.
While integrated GPUs are not as powerful as dedicated graphics cards, they are more than adequate for everyday use, allowing computer users to perform common graphical tasks without the added expense of a dedicated graphics card.
It is suggested to consider the iGPU of Intel and AMD processors while purchasing.
Intel Processor iGPU
Intel processors with integrated graphics are called Intel UHD Graphics. The performance of Intel’s integrated graphics varies depending on the specific model, but higher-end processors generally will have better graphics performance.
For example, Intel’s 11th Gen processors offer improved graphics performance compared to previous generations.
AMD Processor iGPU
AMD processors with integrated graphics are commonly known as AMD Radeon Graphics. This integrated graphics performance is better than Intel’s, and the company’s latest processors offer improved graphics performance compared to previous generations.
Note: If gaming is a priority, an Intel or AMD processor with a dedicated GPU is recommended, as integrated GPUs are not as powerful as dedicated GPUs.
AMD or Intel Processors – Which One Is The Winner?
In our opinion, there is no clear winner between AMD and Intel processors, as each has its own strengths and weaknesses. The choice between the two ultimately comes down to personal preference, budget, and the specific requirements of the task at hand.
AMD processors have the advantage of offering better value for money, with many models providing excellent performance at a lower cost compared to Intel processors.
They also tend to have better-performing integrated graphics and are favored by gamers looking for a balance between performance and affordability.
Intel, on the other side, has a long history of producing top-performance processors, particularly in the high-end market. Their processors are known for their fast clock speeds and strong single-core performance. Therefore, they are preferred by content creators and power users who demand easy load management.
All in all, here is a summary of Intel VS. AMD processors and which we believe takes the point for different considerations:
| Comparison factor | Intel | AMD |
|---|---|---|
| CPU Pricing and Value | X | |
| Gaming Performance | X | |
| Content Creation/Productivity | ✗ | |
| Specifications | ✗ | |
| Overclocking | ✗ | |
| Power Consumption | ✗ | |
| Drivers and Software | ✗ | |
| Process Node | ✗ | |
| Architecture | X | ✗ |
| Security | ✗ |
Intel VS.
AMD Comparison Summary
Whether you’re a gaming enthusiast looking for great value or a power user needing raw performance, both AMD and Intel have options that can meet your needs.
Also see:
Yamna is a highly skilled researcher with a specialization in Biotechnology. She draws on her extensive knowledge, experience and ability to research concepts in depth to produce writings that demystify complex technology-related topics.
View Archive
Comparison of AMD 3020e and Intel Core i5-4402E
Comparative analysis of AMD 3020e and Intel Core i5-4402E processors by all known characteristics in the categories: General Information, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphical Interfaces, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security and Reliability, Technology, Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark.
AMD 3020e
versus
Intel Core i5-4402E
Benefits
Reasons to choose AMD 3020e
- Newer processor, production date difference 6 year(s) 3 month(s)
- more powerful, but with lower power consumption: 14 nm vs 22 nm
- L2 cache is 2 times larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
- L3 cache is about 33% larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
- 4.
2 times less power consumption: 6 Watt vs 25 Watt
| Release date | 6 Jan 2020 vs 1 October 2013 |
| Process | 14 nm vs 22 nm |
| Level 2 cache | 1MB vs 512KB |
| Level 3 cache | 4MB vs 3MB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt vs 25 Watt |
Reasons to choose Intel Core i5-4402E
- 2 more threads: 4 vs 2
- About 4% more clock speed: 2.70 GHz vs 2.6 GHz
- PassMark — Single thread mark about 7% better performance: 1510 vs 1415
- PassMark — CPU mark about 10% better performance: 2681 vs 2447
| 4 vs 2 | |
| Maximum frequency | 2. 70 GHz vs 2.6 GHz |
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1510 vs 1415 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 2681 vs 2447 |
Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: AMD 3020e
CPU 2: Intel Core i5-4402E
| PassMark — Single thread mark |
|
|||
| PassMark — CPU mark |
|
| Name | AMD 3020e | Intel Core i5-4402E |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1415 | 1510 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 2447 | 2681 |
Performance comparison
| AMD 3020e | Intel Core i5-4402E | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture name | Zen | Haswell |
| Production date | 6 Jan 2020 | October 1, 2013 |
| OPN Tray | YM3020C7T2OFG | |
| Ranking | 1528 | 1441 |
| Applicability | Laptop | Embedded |
| Price at first issue date | $266 | |
| Processor Number | i5-4402E | |
| Series | 4th Generation Intel® Core™ i5 Processors | |
| Status | Launched | |
| Base frequency | 1. 2 GHz |
1.60 GHz |
| Compute Cores | 5 | |
| Level 2 cache | 1MB | 512KB |
| Level 3 cache | 4MB | 3MB |
| Process | 14nm | 22nm |
| Maximum frequency | 2.6 GHz | 2.70 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 2 |
| Number of GPU cores | 3 | |
| Number of threads | 2 | 4 |
| Support 64 bit | ||
| Bus Speed | 5 GT/s DMI2 | |
| Crystal area | 130mm | |
| Level 1 cache | 128KB | |
| Maximum core temperature | 100°C | |
| Number of transistors | 960 Million | |
| Maximum number of memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR3L 1333/1600 |
| ECC support | ||
| Maximum memory size | 16GB | |
| Graphics base frequency | 1000MHz | 400MHz |
| Number of iGPU cores | 3 | |
| Integrated graphics | Radeon Vega 3 | Intel® HD Graphics 4600 |
| Graphics max dynamic frequency | 900MHz | |
| Maximum GPU clock | 900MHz | |
| Intel® Clear Video Technology HD | ||
| Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI) | ||
| Intel® InTru™ 3D Technology | ||
| Intel® Quick Sync Video | ||
| Video memory size | 1. 7GB |
|
| DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
| eDP | ||
| Maximum number of monitors supported | 3 | |
| VGA | ||
| WiDi support | ||
| Supported sockets | FT5 | FCBGA1364 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Maximum number of processors in configuration | 1 | |
| Package Size | 37. 5mm x 32mm x 1.6mm |
|
| PCI Express revision | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Number of PCI Express lanes | 16 | |
| PCIe configurations | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8 2×4 | |
| Scalability | 1S Only | |
| Anti-Theft Technology | ||
| Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
| Intel® Secure Key Technology | ||
| Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT) | ||
| Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology | ||
| Flexible Display interface (FDI) | ||
| Idle States | ||
| Extended instructions | Intel® SSE4. 1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
|
| Intel 64 | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology | ||
| Intel® Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP) | ||
| Intel® TSX-NI | ||
| Intel® Turbo Boost Technology | ||
| Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility | ||
| Thermal Monitoring | ||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) | ||
| Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) |
Red or blue? Comparison of processors Intel and AMD
The main element of any PC is the processor that performs all computing operations, and the overall performance depends on the performance of which.
And if the manufacturers of video cards and motherboards are a dime a dozen, then only two companies are engaged in the production of processors — Intel and AMD. Their eternal battle has become as classic as the confrontation between Sub-Zero and Scorpio, Real Madrid and Barcelona, Lannisters and Starks.
In this article, we will compare the key features of the two systems and try to answer the age-old question of which one is cooler.
What determines processor performance?
In order to better understand how the processors of both companies differ, let’s start with the basic concepts of performance. What exactly determines the power and what characteristics to look for when choosing?
Frequency
Everything is simple here: the higher the maximum frequency, the more productive the CPU (note: the central processing unit). If you need performance in games and heavy applications, then we advise you to focus on the border of 3.
5 GHz. That’s the number you’ll see in the minimum system requirements for new toys like Red Dead Redemption 2 and Outer World. Although, for games, the performance of the video card will still be more important. Usually Intel processors were ahead here, but now the situation is approximately equal.
Cores and threads
Perhaps the main parameter for today when choosing. For comfortable gameplay in 2019, you need at least a quad-core CPU. For simple tasks like surfing the net, two will suffice. For complex calculations such as audio-video rendering, 8 or more cores are ideally needed. It is also worth remembering about multithreading — these are additional virtual cores that help out a lot in heavy tasks. Here the picture is better with AMD, which adds multithreading even to low-cost 9-caliber processors.0804 AMD Ryzen 5 Summit Ridge 1400 BOX .
Process and architecture
To simplify, here you can follow a simple rule, the newer the better.
For example, the once top-end fourth-generation Intel Core i7 Haswell i7-4770K now shows almost the same performance as the budget Intel Core i3 Coffee Lake i3-8100 BOX Price from 52,604 to 58,305 tenge. eighth generation.
Intel has the most up-to-date line of Coffee Lake Refresh at the moment. As the name suggests, this is essentially a cosmetic update to the previous Coffe Lake series, only with slightly increased clock speeds and better prices. You can see an overview of the most interesting processors in this series in the article “Coffee Lake Refresh revision: which Intel processor to choose in 2019year.» AMD recently debuted a completely new Zen 2 architecture (read about it in the article «Comparison of AMD X470 and X570 chipsets what’s new?»), On the basis of which the company was able to introduce the first mainstream processors with 12 and 16 cores — AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3900X BOX and AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3950X BOX . However, the previous generation of Ryzen still kicks ass and runs on simpler and cheaper motherboards.
Key difference between AMD and Intel
Over the past 10 years, AMD has been labeled «cheap and cheerful» while Intel has been associated with high quality and performance. After the release of breakthrough Ryzen processors, the situation changed: AMD ceased to be associated with cheapness and poor performance, and Intel received a magic pendel that forced it to look for new strategies and reduce prices.
The lines have blurred in 2019, but a quick look still reveals one key difference. As a rule, Intel relies on higher nominal frequencies, AMD attracts potential buyers with the number of cores and multithreading. As sales show, those who want to vote in rubles for the second option are much more. From the report of the largest German online store MindFactory.de for October 2019year, we can see that Ryzen CPUs are sold almost 4 times more than Intel — 78% versus 22%. But this does not mean that AMD is cooler than Intel and you can disagree. Both companies have their strengths and weaknesses, as well as hit models and frankly unsuccessful processors.
Game performance comparison
As the review and tests show, the differences between modern CPU models from competing companies are no longer so significant. Intel is still the king of gaming systems, but its dominance is not that significant. With top-end GTX 1080 Ti graphics cards, top-end Intel processors like the i7-8700K have better performance in most modern games. In the future, it is possible that the situation will change in favor of AMD processors with a large number of threads due to improved multi-threading support in new games.
When comparing average FPS at Ultra graphics settings and FullHD resolution, Intel processors are on average 10% faster than their direct competitors from AMD. However, the size of the gap depends on the game itself. For example, in Shadow of the Tomb Raider , the Intel Core i9 Coffee Lake Refresh i9-9900K BOX produces an average of 17 FPS more than the AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3900X BOX — 131 FPS versus 114 FPS.
And in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, on the contrary, the gap is reduced to a measly 4 FPS. At the same time 9The 900K can be found on sale for almost $100 less than the 3900X.
So is Intel still the king of gaming? Not really. In terms of the «dollar to FPS» ratio (note: price to performance ratio), in most cases, CPUs from AMD are in the lead. Below you can see a comparison table that collects the average frames per second from 8 popular games in 2019, as well as how much one FPS costs.
As you can see, out of 11 models, there are only 3 Intel processors in the top. The remaining 8 are representatives of the «red» camp. Moreover, budget models like AMD Ryzen 5 Summit Ridge 1600 BOX 14 nm , and high-performance CPUs of caliber AMD Ryzen 7 Pinnacle Ridge 2700X BOX turn out to be profitable.
In general, the unspoken rule «Intel is more expensive and faster in games» is confirmed again. But the gap is not significant.
Performance comparison at work
And here the most interesting begins. The fact is that for a long time Intel confidently left AMD behind both in games and in work applications. And if you looked into the working PC of a famous music producer, hardened video editor or experienced graphics specialist, then with a probability of 99% you would see a powerful Core i7 or Core i9 there. Intel chips have become synonymous with fast and reliable performance — Apple and other PC and laptop manufacturers use only them, and specialized software manufacturers Steinberg, Adobe, Ableton, Output, or Waves optimize their software with Intel in mind.
In 2019, the situation has become much more complicated. With more cores and threads (for the same price), processors like the Ryzen 3600X caliber have more power headroom than a comparable Intel CPU.
But due to software optimization for Intel, this difference is not always fully disclosed. For example, in tests on plug-in loading in Reaper, identical Intel chips outperform AMD competitors by almost 30%.
In the table below you can see the general results of the SYSmark 2018 synthetic test. They should be taken seriously because they are not considered conditional “parrots”, but system performance when performing various user scenarios such as working in Acrobat Pro, Photoshop, BowPad, Excel or PowerPoint. As you can see, the new processors with the Zen 2 microarchitecture have significantly improved their results — if a year ago the eight-core Ryzen 7 2700X in SYSmark 2018 did not fall far short of modern Core i5 processors, the new six-core Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 confidently outperform the direct competitor in the face of the six-core Core i5 and almost overtake the higher-end Core i7-8700K, which costs $150 more.
What is even more interesting, this pattern is observed in any test that simulates everyday work with content, rendering, complex calculations, etc.
Apparently, such a breakthrough happened due to the fact that AMD implemented full-fledged execution of AVX2 instructions in Zen 2 and doubled L3 cache. Compared to previous generations, the performance of the new six-core AMD relative to the Ryzen 5 2600X increased by an average of 20% and reached the level of the eight-core Ryzen 7 1800X of the previous generation. Impressive result!
How else do Intel and AMD processors differ?
Acceleration
In general terms, the ability to overclock the processor and RAM even on budget boards should also be added to the treasury of AMD’s advantages. And a free multiplier, which greatly simplifies the overclocking process. Intel, on the other hand, often plays around with artificial limitations, when only processors with the “K” index can be overclocked, and only on motherboards with top-end chipsets of the “Z” series. However, the latest lines of both companies already have an outrageous Turbo Boost and it’s not so easy to squeeze something out of them.
Especially when it comes to the «stones» of the upper and top level.
Socket updates
Intel has one tricky feature that does not paint it. Namely, systematic socket updates every few years. The most relevant at the moment is the LGA 1151 v2 socket, but it has already run off its 2 years and with a high probability we will see an updated socket with the release of the new Comet Lake generation. All this greatly complicates the upgrade process, if after 3-4 years you want to change the processor to a more modern one, then most likely you will have to spend money on a new motherboard. And this is actually the floor of the computer.
In contrast, AMD updates when it’s needed and still uses the AM4 platform introduced in 2016. Given that the new top 12 and 16-core Ryzen processors are running on the same socket, the end user is left with a big win. Of course, putting such a monster on a budget motherboard three years ago will not work, but the available room for maneuver cannot but rejoice.
Integrated graphics
There are times when the system needs to do without a video card or «sit out» on the integrated graphics before buying a discrete one. This option is quite real, especially if you are not an avid gamer. Intel processors, with the exception of top models, have an integrated Intel UHD Graphics graphics core. Its performance is not as good as that of competitors, but it is enough for 4K output, hardware video decoding, browsing and light tasks.
At the same time, AMD processors with integrated Vega graphics set the bar high: they do a good job with not too voracious multiplayer games like Dota 2, World of Tanks, CS:GO and Fortnite, delivering 50-60 FPS in FullHD resolution and medium graphics settings. Even cooler, the Vega 8 is the first integrated graphics card to run GTA 5 and The Witcher 3 at the bare minimum. In general, the performance here is almost at the level of the GT 1030 and far ahead of the integrated graphics in Intel processors.
Output
From all of the above, you might get the impression that AMD is better than Intel in everything (integrated graphics, number of cores + multithreading, price), but in fact this is a rap vs. rock debate and a lot depends on personal preferences. For example, integrated graphics are more useful for budget or office PCs where there is no discrete graphics card. If you have it, then there is not much point in overpaying for Vega or Intel UHD. Multithreading drags in heavy applications, but in games it practically does not affect FPS.
So everything comes down to price. And you know what? The situation here is also ambiguous. It used to be: Intel is expensive and powerful, AMD is cheap and cheerful. But Ryzen chips have changed everything, AMD is no longer dumping like a desperate one, and Intel, under the yoke of competition, decently reduces prices. Especially on inexpensive processors.