View Full Version : Intel VS AMD Gaming Performance
Please check this out if you still wonder what to put in your system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV2Voo5h3eU
He only tested it in bf3.. which is a game that does like multi core cpu's
If you play something like Black-ops, you will be faster with a i5 or i7.
Since Intel cpu's are alot faster PER core.
So 2 intel cores vs 2 amd ones. The Intel will win hands down. AMD's CPU's are good when you combine multiple cores, hence they have all these 6 & 8 core models.
Advice still remains
Can you afford a i5 3570K? Get that
If you can't ,look at Piledriver :)
He only tested it in bf3.. which is a game that does like multi core cpu's
If you play something like Black-ops, you will be faster with a i5 or i7.
Since Intel cpu's are alot faster PER core.
So 2 intel cores vs 2 amd ones. The Intel will win hands down. AMD's CPU's are good when you combine multiple cores, hence they have all these 6 & 8 core models.
Advice still remains
Can you afford a i5 3570K? Get that
If you can't ,look at Piledriver :)
Why do you think that with only one core results will be much different? 8 cores vs 8 cores show 5 frames difference. 1 core vs 1 core should show same thing. Or intel have magic boost of CPU core?
Subject of video should be "Is it worth buying"
He only tested it in bf3.. which is a game that does like multi core cpu's
If you play something like Black-ops, you will be faster with a i5 or i7.
Since Intel cpu's are alot faster PER core.
So 2 intel cores vs 2 amd ones. The Intel will win hands down. AMD's CPU's are good when you combine multiple cores, hence they have all these 6 & 8 core models.
Advice still remains
Can you afford a i5 3570K? Get that
If you can't ,look at Piledriver :)
Why do you think that with only one core results will be much different? 8 cores vs 8 cores show 5 frames difference. 1 core vs 1 core should show same thing. Or intel have magic boost of CPU core?
Subject of video should be "Is it worth buying"
Per core performance of Intel is way better. AMD shines in multithreaded applications. LIke games that support 4 cores (battlefield) or more.
So if you play a game that only uses 2 cores of the AMD's 6 cores. And only uses 2 cores of intels 4 core. Intel will come out on top since their per core performance is better.
And yea, AMD is worth buying. Personally I'd stick with Intel, simply because they have been faster the last years and are years ahead when it comes to technology (28nm etc, Haswell)
Hangover
2013-02-10, 16:25
Iﾂｴm pleased with my AMD FX-8350 8-Core. It runs in 4.3 ghz in turbo mode. Havent tried it in 5 ghz though i donﾂｴt have liquid cooling
The one they tested is an 6 core that runs in 3,5 ghz
In my company there is bunch of PC-s. most of them are Intel q9650 or newer i7 but we have AMD also. we use them for all kind of tasks during development process. ﾃつ*My pc is based on intel quad core q9650 and when we are making new build (building project) PC starts to slow down as CPU is almost totally used. Cpu not Ram :). ﾃつ*Guys with AMD have similar things. When we are doing our builds there is no big difference on what you do, Intel or AMD.
So, gaming and software development don't see difference. So where is difference?
I personally want i7 in my future notebook (maybe will change to amd). for me intel s currently overpriced as i don't see or have any purpose where i can use that intel super power :)
Tabernac
2013-02-10, 18:12
Cave whats the best AMD CPU at the moment? i got a ﾃつ*AM3+ MB
FluggerNO
2013-02-10, 18:34
Cave whats the best AMD CPU at the moment? i got a ﾂ*AM3+ MB
I do belive its the AMD FX-8350 8-Core
And I have to put it out there. AMD is more bang for the buck.
when i was upgrading my PC there was already Buldozer on market. I checked tests and noticed that Phenom 1090T and 1100T have higher core per core power then Buldozer. Maybe something changed during last year. I got my self 1090 and i am really happy.
Cave whats the best AMD CPU at the moment? i got a ﾂ*AM3+ MB
I do belive its the AMD FX-8350 8-Core
And I have to put it out there. AMD is more bang for the buck.
Bulldozer didn't, Piledriver does :D
Around Sandybridge Intel was most Bang 4 buck aswell.
But now it's AMD agian yes, Agreed.
when i was upgrading my PC there was already Buldozer on market. I checked tests and noticed that Phenom 1090T and 1100T have higher core per core power then Buldozer. Maybe something changed during last year. I got my self 1090 and i am really happy.
They changed their whole architecture of the CPU.
The Phenoms were better than Bulldozer, But they fixed alot with Piledriver :)
I like the case o.O, o i already got it Xd only bigger :P
but intel is way faster ? so like ? 5-20 sec ? faster but 200 euro more expensive ? i will just wait 20 sec with a 200 euro cheaper processor of thats the reason ? i dont think Black-Ops is slower with 2 vs 2 core ﾃつ*also thats secs of differents what ? like 5-10 sec ? but again 200 euro more to pay. rather to buy something else of the 200 euro ?.
I always had AMD and planning to stay ( because intel wont become cheaper) and never have problems with AMD!
Mayby need to remind you guys that xbox 720 and the playstation 4 both use AMD 8 core apu's so new games will take way better advantage of multicore processors.
I like the case o.O, o i already got it Xd only bigger :P
but intel is way faster ? so like ? 5-20 sec ? faster but 200 euro more expensive ? i will just wait 20 sec with a 200 euro cheaper processor of thats the reason ? i dont think Black-Ops is slower with 2 vs 2 core ﾂ*also thats secs of differents what ? like 5-10 sec ? but again 200 euro more to pay. rather to buy something else of the 200 euro ?.
What you think doesn't matter :) Benchmarks show that Intel's CPUs are faster per core.
I always had AMD and planning to stay ( because intel wont become cheaper) and never have problems with AMD!
i5 3570K = 200 euro
AMD 8 core = ~180 euro
20 euro price difference..
Also, do you have a clue how long 5-20 seconds is? That's an eternity in games. Average it takes 0.5 seconds to kill somebody in battlefield 3 if you land all your shots. In 20 seconds I can kill 10 people.
No it's not in seconds it's in frames. 2-7 frames It can differ yes. It's isn't spectacular. What ﾂ*CPU's do anyway is feed data to ﾂ*a gpu. That's why comparisons like this are not really relevant imo. If CPU is not bottlenecking your GPU, no problem. So with an AMD 8 core you can do what? SLI 670's. I don't know but at one point or another it will bottleneck and you will have to go for Intel's higher end CPU's (2011 socket) to not be bottlenecked.
Since there is barely a price difference , no reason to go for AMD over Intel or from AMD to Intel.
Sure you can stick with AMD, amd is fine. Nothing wrong with their CPU's for ﾂ*normal gaming.(read, no 3-way SLI 680 nonsense)
But nobody can ever deny that technology wise, Intel is lightyears ahead simply with nanometer transistors.
AMD's top model is competing with the lowest end i7 3770. AMDs Piledriver keeps up with Midrange Ivy Bridge wile Haswell is planned to be released this year.
Intels top model, 3970X Slaps the fuck out of 2 AMD's 8 cores combined. So on term of Speed, intel is complete king. On terms of Price/Performance Ratio, scales are towards AMD, but not by much atm.
On terms of budget CPU's. AMD wins all across the board simply because there lower end 4 Core piledriver is priced so good you barely get an i3 for the same money.
One thing Bulldozer had tough is that generally their CPU's are badly supported. For example friend of mine has that 6 core from the Video and a 670. He gets about 10-20 frames less in Planetside 2 than me, with my 2500K & 6950 2GB. He has equall processing power and far superior GPU. So in theory he should get better FPS than me.
But what Cave said, with the new Consoles running AMD we might see a big change in CPU world.
for now,
So it's very simple
for a 1200 euro PC or more.I'd go with Intel 100%. For anything below ﾂ*800. I'd go AMD 100%
Between 800-1200 it varies on all sorts of stuff
Yes Intel Core i7-3970X kick the shit out of AMD FX-8350 Vishera. But check this also.
Name ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ*Price ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* Passmark Benchmark ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* Price/Performance
[hr:5bcaa4f18b]
Intel Core i7-3970X ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |1079$ ﾂ* ﾂ* |12815 ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |11.87
[hr:5bcaa4f18b]
AMD FX-8350 Vishera ﾂ* ﾂ*|189$ ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |9169 ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ*|48.26
[hr:5bcaa4f18b]
intel is faster for 39% but is 6 time in price. Don't think that they are in same weight category.
Links where i took all this data.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3970X+%40+3.50GHz&id=1799
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780
Intel Xeon E5-4650 kick ass to all of them but it is server CPU.
Yes Intel Core i7-3970X kick the shit out of AMD FX-8350 Vishera. But check this also.
Name ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ*Price ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* Passmark Benchmark ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* Price/Performance
[hr:e4b903f9cc]
Intel Core i7-3970X ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |1079$ ﾂ* ﾂ* |12815 ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |11.87
[hr:e4b903f9cc]
AMD FX-8350 Vishera ﾂ* ﾂ*|189$ ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* |9169 ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ* ﾂ*|48.26
[hr:e4b903f9cc]
intel is faster for 39% but is 6 time in price. Don't think that they are in same weight category.
Links where i took all this data.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3970X+%40+3.50GHz&id=1799
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+FX-8350+Eight-Core&id=1780
Intel Xeon E5-4650 kick ass to all of them but it is server CPU.
I was talking about i7 3770K or i5 3570K vs AMD FX-8350. Since those are in the same league.
But yea, the 3970X obviously costs you a fortune :D
Also. 3D Mark CPU bench, the 3970X is almost twice as fast :)
i7 3970X - 40 725
AMD FX-8350 - 22 213
http://nl.hardware.info/productinfo/benchmarks/3/processors?products[]=148847&specId=6967&tcId=230
Damn, my bad then ﾃつ*:D
Yes, that thing is so expensive.
Amd is still cheaper then 3770. Not big difference in performance.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3770K+%40+3.50GHz&id=2
Well, this is eternal question. What is better, Star Track or Star Wars. So....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.