AMD vs. Intel
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 12411
- Joined: 19 Mar 2004, 02:00
- Location: Journeying towards the Dark Tower...
Re: AMD vs. Intel
As far as my knowledge goes (and I'm not that clued up on AMD these days), AM3 is still their high-performance socket. The FM1 (and now FM2) is for their APUs. Might actually be a good choice for a multimedia PC, since they have very solid GPUs connected directly on the CPU die.
Review on one here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/am ... apu,1.html
Review on one here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/am ... apu,1.html
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 14085
- Joined: 06 Oct 2004, 02:00
- Location: Location, Location...
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Thanks MT.
Edit: Are these out yet? I see that article keeps referring to Socket FM2, but Prophecy and the like have that APU as a Socket FM1- or is this not the same APU I'm looking at?
Edit: Are these out yet? I see that article keeps referring to Socket FM2, but Prophecy and the like have that APU as a Socket FM1- or is this not the same APU I'm looking at?
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Yip, as MT says, an A series might be a good idea for a media PC, but for pretty much everything else, Intel is the way to go.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 14085
- Joined: 06 Oct 2004, 02:00
- Location: Location, Location...
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Nevermind, I seem to have the 3870K and 5600K mixed up. I blame the review- they keep referring to the damned thing. I'm not even sure what they're reviewing.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 12411
- Joined: 19 Mar 2004, 02:00
- Location: Journeying towards the Dark Tower...
Re: AMD vs. Intel
FM2 seems to be the next generation of APUs, sort-of like Sandybridge to Ivybridge. Doesn't look like it's available just yet, so maybe wait a while?
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 14085
- Joined: 06 Oct 2004, 02:00
- Location: Location, Location...
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I guess so. Will have to wait anyway- too many things right now want (need) money. But hopefully closer to the new year.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 48
- Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 00:35
- Location: Jeffreys Bay
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
The new APU family on FM2 is similar to the changeover to Ivy Bridge, but with FM2 there's a lot of optimisations to power consumption and it will accommodate the 28nm/22nm, processors that will eventually be launched next year on the same socket. Like AM3+, FM2 will have a much longer shelf life.Mystical_Titan wrote:FM2 seems to be the next generation of APUs, sort-of like Sandybridge to Ivybridge. Doesn't look like it's available just yet, so maybe wait a while?
As for availability, one of my sources claims that general availability will be at the end of this month for the A10-5800K and the A8-5600K, along with FM2 boards using the A55 and A75 chipset. A85 is subject to how quickly board partners get their stuff here.
NAG Online Hardware Writer
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Intel is releasing their new Sandy Bridge-E processor, the 3970X as a replacement for the 3960X. 200mhz higher clock with a 100mhz higher turbo boost clock.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cor ... ,3348.html
Nukes... always nukes.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cor ... ,3348.html
Nukes... always nukes.
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Well, AMD seems to have made a move back into a competitive price/performance bracket with the new Piledriver revision of the disastrous Bulldozer architecture. Here is how they have priced it:
With increased efficiency enabling higher clock rates for the same TDP, AMD Piledriver is now suddenly a worthy option in my book, while crucially not being beaten in many benchmarks by the freaking Phenom II chips! Now looking forward to them rolling out 20nm sometime in the future! Then maybe the huge power consumption will come down a bit as well. Still, feeling a lot better about the future of AMD CPU's now than I did last year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the- ... 300-tested
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx- ... ,3328.html
With increased efficiency enabling higher clock rates for the same TDP, AMD Piledriver is now suddenly a worthy option in my book, while crucially not being beaten in many benchmarks by the freaking Phenom II chips! Now looking forward to them rolling out 20nm sometime in the future! Then maybe the huge power consumption will come down a bit as well. Still, feeling a lot better about the future of AMD CPU's now than I did last year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the- ... 300-tested
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx- ... ,3328.html
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
- hamin_aus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18363
- Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 3770K
- Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
- Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
- Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
- Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Nice that AMD are "competitive" in the low/mid-range CPU market again
They have to literally cram cache and cores onto their CPU's just to break even... it's almost laughable when I remember how in the 90's AMD CPU's could do more work than Intel's per cycle and it was Intel that were doing this to keep up.
Hopefully AMD can stay in the game until they get their act together... as much as I prefer Intel CPU's they need competition to keep them honest.
Still wouldn't touch an AMD CPU
They have to literally cram cache and cores onto their CPU's just to break even... it's almost laughable when I remember how in the 90's AMD CPU's could do more work than Intel's per cycle and it was Intel that were doing this to keep up.
Hopefully AMD can stay in the game until they get their act together... as much as I prefer Intel CPU's they need competition to keep them honest.
Still wouldn't touch an AMD CPU
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I won't touch an AMD cpu again until they sort out their high end products.
Re: AMD vs. Intel
If you read the Anandtech review, he makes a few interesting projections of performance by AMD and Intel based on their respective road maps and things might start to look very interesting towards 2014. Already AMD beats Intel in heavily threaded applications, with the FX-8350 even beating out the fastest I7 in that review on some benches with a large price advantage. The fact that they are competitive again in any way at all is very encouraging indeed after Bulldozer and things look to be getting only better.hamin_aus wrote:Nice that AMD are "competitive" in the low/mid-range CPU market again
They have to literally cram cache and cores onto their CPU's just to break even... it's almost laughable when I remember how in the 90's AMD CPU's could do more work than Intel's per cycle and it was Intel that were doing this to keep up.
Hopefully AMD can stay in the game until they get their act together... as much as I prefer Intel CPU's they need competition to keep them honest.
Still wouldn't touch an AMD CPU
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
- hamin_aus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18363
- Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 3770K
- Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
- Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
- Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
- Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Yes, projections by hardware bloggers... always a safe bet those
I don't want to bash AMD too much because I really do appreciate their importance in the market, but they didn't beat the i7 on "some" multi-thread benches - they beat it in one.
However the mere fact that they can keep up with a chip twice the price is impressive.
I don't want to bash AMD too much because I really do appreciate their importance in the market, but they didn't beat the i7 on "some" multi-thread benches - they beat it in one.
However the mere fact that they can keep up with a chip twice the price is impressive.
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Those test on toms just proves AMD still has a way to go. The power consumption is just too high and performance/price wise its battling the i5.
- hamin_aus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18363
- Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 3770K
- Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
- Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
- Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
- Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Well when you have 8 physical cores on a CPU you are going to run hotter and use more power than a chip with 4 physical and 4 logical cores. Thats not going to change.
Why haven't AMD been able to come up with their own flavour of hyper-threading? Are they incapable or is there some warped logic behind the decision?
It must hurt them financially to have to cram 8 physical cores on a CPU and still price their chip below an Intel design with only 4...
Can they really keep this up
Why haven't AMD been able to come up with their own flavour of hyper-threading? Are they incapable or is there some warped logic behind the decision?
It must hurt them financially to have to cram 8 physical cores on a CPU and still price their chip below an Intel design with only 4...
Can they really keep this up
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Their line was that physical cores are better than virtual ones and the threaded benchmarks prove their point. Thing is, they are way behind in the single threaded applications, but catching up. I don't think the new chip architecture is necessarily more expensive to produce. 8 cores for an AMD CPU does not mean the same thing as 8 cores for an Intel CPU.
I have a feeling that in a few years' time we will see a whole other situation in the CPU market.
I have a feeling that in a few years' time we will see a whole other situation in the CPU market.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
- THE_STIG
- Spoiled Brat
- Posts: 11762
- Joined: 26 Aug 2010, 20:33
- Processor: Core i7 6800k
- Motherboard: Asrock x99 taichi
- Graphics card: Zotac 1080ti amp extreme
- Memory: 16gb(4x4gb) corsair vengeance
- Location: Some say.......
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I sure hope so. Intel dominance is becoming seriously boringKALSTER wrote:I have a feeling that in a few years' time we will see a whole other situation in the CPU market.
- hamin_aus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18363
- Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 3770K
- Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
- Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
- Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
- Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Are we looking at the same benchmarksKALSTER wrote:the threaded benchmarks prove their point
AMD beat Intel in ONE benchmark out of like 5...
Yes we all know physical cores beat logical ones, thanks for newsflash - but is the added heat and power consumption worth the gain?
Not really IMO. And the CPU market would seem to agree...
MAYBE when more apps can properly use multiple threads... but if you look at where HT was 5 years ago and where it is today, who is to say it wont have improved in a few years time when your cryptic "whole other situation in the CPU market" is due to take place.
Re: AMD vs. Intel
You are looking at the best from Intel vs the best from AMD, when you should be looking at where their price points pit them against. It's like condemning Kia for not trading blows with BMW. As for physical cores beating virtual cores; I was paraphrasing AMD's spiel. The new architecture is not simply having to fit more cores on a single die, it is a whole new way of doing things, as I am sure you know. AMD's aim is to do the multi-treading thing in a whole different way that would show better performance vs power usage. They haven't done that yet, but I think they might be on their way.hamin_aus wrote:Are we looking at the same benchmarksKALSTER wrote:the threaded benchmarks prove their point
AMD beat Intel in ONE benchmark out of like 5...
Yes we all know physical cores beat logical ones, thanks for newsflash - but is the added heat and power consumption worth the gain?
At the moment a large problem for AMD is that they still rely on 32nm, while Intel has already gone to 22nm. Sure, they are still inefficient when compared to Sandy Bridge, but much less so than any of their previous incarnations.
Who knows, AMD might also move to 3D designs after 2014. All I am saying is that AMD is looking a whole lot better than they did a year ago and my statement is "cryptic", because it is just a feeling at this point.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
The only good area AMD have is the FM series with integrated graphics. At this point Intel has run so far ahead that it seems nvidia and intel might try to off one another.
- THE_STIG
- Spoiled Brat
- Posts: 11762
- Joined: 26 Aug 2010, 20:33
- Processor: Core i7 6800k
- Motherboard: Asrock x99 taichi
- Graphics card: Zotac 1080ti amp extreme
- Memory: 16gb(4x4gb) corsair vengeance
- Location: Some say.......
Re: AMD vs. Intel
AMD does look in better shape now than it did this time last year. But they are still behind Intel, and Intel's next generation of CPU's is not that far away whereas AMD are still trying to get the current generation of CPU's to work properly.
So personally I still dont feel that AMD is much of an option. Their integrated graphics is actually not bad but the high power draw is still an issue
So personally I still dont feel that AMD is much of an option. Their integrated graphics is actually not bad but the high power draw is still an issue
Re: AMD vs. Intel
Oh sure, I am gunning for AMD, but if I had the means to buy a new system now, I'd go Intel without a second thought.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
Intel i5 2500; AsRock Z77 Extreme 4; Asus GTX580; 4x 2GB DDR3 1333; Intel 520 240GB SSD + 2x WD 3TB + 2TB Samsung; Samsung 22X DVD/RW; 23" LG W2343T-PF; Huntkey 700W
- THE_STIG
- Spoiled Brat
- Posts: 11762
- Joined: 26 Aug 2010, 20:33
- Processor: Core i7 6800k
- Motherboard: Asrock x99 taichi
- Graphics card: Zotac 1080ti amp extreme
- Memory: 16gb(4x4gb) corsair vengeance
- Location: Some say.......
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I have an Intel system and am upgrading to another one. But I still prefer AMD, if they were a bit more competitive I would buy AMD in a heartbeat
I loved our old Athlon XP 2500. It overclocked well too, gave my hateful Pentium 4 511 a run
I loved our old Athlon XP 2500. It overclocked well too, gave my hateful Pentium 4 511 a run
-
- Registered Pervert
- Posts: 6879
- Joined: 30 Jul 2004, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 4790k
- Motherboard: MSI Z97 Gaming 7
- Graphics card: MSI GTX780Ti Gaming
- Memory: G.Skill Sniper 1866mhz 16GB
- Location: The Greater Unknown
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I went from Intel Celeron to AMD and switched back to Intel during the quad core transition. But ever since i7 I never looked back.
- hamin_aus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 18363
- Joined: 28 Aug 2003, 02:00
- Processor: Intel i7 3770K
- Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP4 TH
- Graphics card: Galax GTX1080
- Memory: 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws
- Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder
- Contact:
Re: AMD vs. Intel
I know that feelTHE_STIG wrote:I loved our old Athlon XP 2500. It overclocked well too, gave my hateful Pentium 4 511 a run
I bought one of the first generation P4 Prescotts and regretted not going with an Athlone XP every day I had that PC...