Advice Request How do you know if you want an Intel or AMD processor?

[Brahman]

AMD always been for people that like multitasking, editing, programming, people that stream live its nice to have many cores

Intel is more for gamers , single core power is insane

Im playing old java based games wich only uses one core, it sucks because i have 6 cores

Where can i get some old java based games? ( sorry for off topic discussion)

 

[Moonhorse]

Where can i get some old java based games? ( sorry for off topic discussion)

I actually meant Old School RuneScape - Play Old School RS wich i have been playing for nearly 17 years, but Games at Miniclip.com - Play Free Online Games used to have plenty

 

[Brahman]

 

[Cheeseman]

As many people said earlier, Intel used to make the very best cpu money can buy. Amd with its current Ryzen/Ryzen Threadripper series essentially destroyed Intel who is sadly only can release the same cpus under different name (and sometimes different prices).
When it comes to gaming and only gaming, intel's Ix (where x can be 3;5;7 or 9)is the go, albeit ryzen 3;5;7 series only offers a few fps less than intel. (albeit at a fraction of its price).
In terms of heavy use, Threadripper is the best option. "Sadly" Amd's absolute top of the line (as of the writing, the new Threadripper Pro series are not avaible yet) Threadripper 3990X is borderline a slightly stripped down Epyc Datacenter-grade processor. A similar Xeon series is about 30k$ (it uses 2 cpu) while the Threadripper is 4k$...
Only intel fanatics/very few people who uses some intel-only tech would buy an intel cpu. The rest would buy Amd.

 

[plat]

I want an Intel i9. Flat out. The problem is that there are too many vulnerabilities and the microcode needed to patch them affects the very performance I would be paying for...dearly. Are they gone in the 10th+ generations, or would there be new ones to discover? I don't know.

I know for a fact the Meldown/Spectre microcode affects (slows) my 6700K. I don't need software to prove this. Intel claims performance impact is "minimal." Whatever.

Intel Side Channel Vulnerabilities: MDS and TAA

MDS and TAA are similar to previously disclosed speculative execution side channel vulnerabilities.

www.intel.com

So, even the most stubborn Intel-minded people can be slowly caving to AMD. Slowly but surely.

 

[Local Host]

AMD has the best price/performance of the market, is all I need.

Not interested in wasting 400€ on a single piece of hardware, I'm fine with playing at 1080p60FPS as for productivity I don't need anything fancy (even an APU will do).

The difference between Intel and AMD is minimal to justify the high prices from Intel, not to mention Intel ridiculous thermal and power draw, due to them still being stuck at 14nm while AMD is already at 7nm.

 

[ForgottenSeer 85179]

. I don't need software to prove this. Intel claims performance impact is "minimal." Whatever.

It's not minimal. Somewhere I read 50% performance loss. And it make sense as whole hyper threading is affected

 

[blackice]

It's not minimal. Somewhere I read 50% performance loss. And it make sense as whole hyper threading is affected

They also run hotter after the patches. My 6700 went up +5C at load.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Old Xeons can Still be good value dependent among wich workload you running.
Only downside is power consumption

 

[HarborFront]

One factor can consider is the availability of Intel vs AMD laptops. In my country you can find Intel laptops in abundance but only a scarcity of AMD models

 

[show-Zi]

I had the impression that AMD was the second choice with a compatible cpu. I think Intel is chosen by name recognition and AMD by performance.
It is also not affected by environmental dependencies such as the relationship between graphics cards and games, which makes selection difficult.

 

[XLR8R]

If it's a desktop PC I always prefer AMD. I've had really bad luck with socket pins on intel motherboards. On AMD the CPU has the socket pins and they are really very strong compared to the weak pins on Intel motherboards.

If it's a laptop, it probably doesn't matter either way.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

If it's a desktop PC I always prefer AMD. I've had really bad luck with socket pins on intel motherboards. On AMD the CPU has the socket pins and they are really very strong compared to the weak pins on Intel motherboards.

If it's a laptop, it probably doesn't matter either way.

Intel method allows smaller pins and ones that are harder to break on the more expansive component (CPU).
But this doesn't really matter.

 

[harlan4096]

 

[brambedkar59]

Ohh no my Kaby LAke

 

[CyberTech]

Very true!

 

[Eggnog]

Competition between Intel and AMD is good for consumers in the long run. One will be on top for a while, then the other. In the end, the consumer wins.

 

[insanity]

Intel laptops usually have slightly better performance, but AMD CPUs offer better battery life, they heat less and are cheaper, so all in all AMD has better value, especially for low end and mid range laptops. Also, AMD processors with integrated graphics (AMD Vega) perform better than Intel's UHD Graphics, so if I decided to buy a laptop with integrated graphics, I would choose AMD.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Intel laptops usually have slightly better performance, but AMD CPUs offer better battery life, they heat less and are cheaper, so all in all AMD has better value, especially for low end and mid range laptops. Also, AMD processors with integrated graphics (AMD Vega) perform better than Intel's UHD Graphics, so if I decided to buy a laptop with integrated graphics, I would choose AMD.

Source that Intel has better performance?
please provide an example comparing competing offering such as R5 4000 VS I5 10TH GEN

 

[Fuzzy_Bunny]

Intel is best buy only if you are gamer and FPS freak. Obviously some games work better on AMD systems.
Overall AMD is better CPU, cheaper and easier to upgrade.