AMD vs. Intel: Best Gaming Processor (CPU)? Comparison of top-end intel and amd processors.

We've covered the "top" worst gaming graphics cards. Now, after the release of Coffee Lake, we can make a list of the worst processors, since nothing very important is observed on the CPU market until the end of the year. Of course, I will only consider the relevance of buying such processors now: if you already own one of the "stones" below, then it means that you clearly had your own reasons for taking it.

Intel Core i7-7740X and Core-i5 7640X (Kaby Lake-X) - welcome to 2010

It's mid-2017. AMD unveils the first honest eight-core desktop processor - Ryzen 7. Intel is unveiling new processors for its high-performance platform, now called Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X. It can include solutions with 16 or even 18 cores, and the simplest representatives have ... stop, 4 cores ?! Hmm, how do they differ from the simple i5-7600K and i7-7700K? The frequencies are the same, the number of memory channels and PCIe lines is the same as the instruction sets. Unless the X-line has a built-in video core, but this is more a minus than a plus. Considering the fact that these processors are more expensive than non-xix counterparts, and motherboards based on the X299 chipset are expensive - there is absolutely no point in buying these "stones", and it is difficult to explain the meaning of their release - well, except that Intel has a lot of unnecessary 4-core crystals.

AMD FX - Goodbye Gaming Bulldozer


The FX line, which was top-notch before Ryzen for almost seven years, can now safely retire. To tell the truth, even at the time of its release it was not top-end: and although the programs showed that the FX-8000 line had as many as 8 cores, in fact it was 4 APUs, and according to tests, the top FX turned out to be at the level of the best i5s, while the i7s were not achievable - that is why Intel then did not "get it out", continuing to release new processors with an increase of 5% in performance per generation. Before the release of the 4-thread Pentiums earlier this year, it made sense to buy the FX-4000 line - they were extremely cheap, but at the same time they made it possible to create a basic gaming system with video cards of the level of GTX 750 Ti and even GTX 950. But, alas, the new Pentiums turned out to be so are good at leaving junior FX out of work. Well, the senior representatives, FX-8000, AMD "finished off" themselves, releasing the younger Ryzen 3 at the same price and with higher performance and lower heat dissipation. So the FX line, which was once a good choice for mid-budget gaming builds, is now finally going to rest.

But still, these processors can be taken in one case - for the sake of an upgrade: for example, if you have an FX-4000 line, now is the time to upgrade to the FX-8000 - you will get a doubling of performance for a fairly small amount of money. Considering that the 8000 line pulls out video cards of the level of GTX 1060 or RX 580, you can easily play comfortably for another couple of years.

Most of the representatives of the Skylake and Kaby Lake lines - Intel smothers "old"

Rumors that Intel should release desktop processors with a large number of cores have been floating around for a long time, and this happened, and since October 5, their tests have flooded the Internet. And, alas, they clearly show that the previous lines no longer have a place under the Sun: why take an 8-thread processor for 19 thousand rubles, if the younger 12-thread processor costs only 20.5 thousand, and even in overclocking the previous generation is worse by at least 20%? Similarly, with the i5, and even more so with the i3 of the 6th and 7th generations - the latter were already meaningless processors on the market after the appearance of the new Pentium, but now, after the release of the 4-core i3 of the 8th generation, the i3 Skylake and Kaby Lake can definitely be written off for scrap.

By the way, now the line of processors from Intel looks quite logical: the lowest-level are 2-core Celerons: they are quite enough for comfortable surfing the Internet and watching movies, and even simple games like Dota, WoT and CS: GO. The next step is Pentium, which has all the same 2 cores, but already 4 threads, and somewhat higher frequencies - on their basis, you can already assemble a low-middle-level gaming system. Core i3, which are now 4-core, take it one step higher, allowing you to build a middle-level build. Well, for the top, there are 6-core i5 and i7 - for those who want the best gaming solution on the market.

But, however, there is one reason why "old" processors should be taken, and it is still the same - an upgrade. For example, a couple of years ago you took a younger i5-6400. And now there is a good opportunity to upgrade it to the i7-7700K, and get a twofold increase in performance, and even not very expensive (especially if you sell an i5).

Haswell-E and Broadwell-E line - oldies at top prices


Let's see how much the 8-core processor of the new Skylake-X line - Intel Core i7-7820X - costs. In Moscow retail, the price tag for it is about 40 thousand rubles. Expensive, you say? Well, here for this price we get 8 cores on a new architecture with a frequency of 4 GHz - quite good for a high-performance PC. Is it expensive anyway? Hmm, okay, let's take a look at the previous generation processors - they should be cheaper, right? So, the analog from Broadwell-E is the i7-6900X: also 8 cores, but on the previous architecture, and the frequencies are about 3.5 GHz. And the price ... 70 thousand rubles ?! Where? Why? Let's look for the pluses of the old processor. And yet, yes, we find one - this is a solder under the lid, which allows it to be overclocked better than representatives of Skylake-X with "mayonnaise" instead of solder. But even if you are very lucky and you overclock the i7-6900X so that it is on the same level as the i7-7820X, this will not remove the almost twofold difference in price.

As a result, Intel this year killed two old lines at once - Broadwell-E and Kaby Lake, and the last one is not even a year old. This is how it is, monopoly ...

AMD Ryzen with X - the company steps on the same rake

Those who remember AMD FX processors know that there was no point in overpaying for older processors in the line - all processors could be overclocked, so the younger "stone" turned into an older one with one light wave of the hand. And for some reason, AMD continued this in Ryzen, and here it comes to the point of absurdity: for example, the younger Ryzen 7 1700 costs about 20 thousand rubles. The older 7 1800X already costs 30 thousand - one and a half times more. And they have the same overclocking potential - about 4 GHz. Should you overpay for 1800X? I think the answer is obvious. And so in all Ryzen lines - 3, 5 and 7 - it makes sense to take a younger processor, without the X index, and overclock it to the level of the older one.

AMD Bristol Ridge - For Those Who Don't Have Ryzen Money


AMD continues to develop its APUs with the same persistence - two-in-one systems, where the average CPU level includes full-fledged graphics from AMD, only with a smaller number of computing units and frequency than in full-fledged video cards. In principle, it is quite a good solution for those who need a simple home PC - the processor's performance is enough for the OS, browser and movies to work quickly, and the GPU will allow you to play even new games, albeit in HD resolution and with low graphics settings. Well, and most importantly, the new APUs are compatible with AM4, that is, in the future, no one bothers to replace such a processor with some Ryzen 7, which is well suited for those who assemble a PC for themselves in stages.

But, on the other hand, yes, this is a budget solution, but why is it based on the Excavator architecture, which is 7 years old at lunchtime, and even 28 nm ?! Was it really so difficult to make these "stones" on Zen, which would also allow reducing the heat dissipation from 65 to 30 watts acceptable for such a system? In general, APUs are strange - on the one hand, new, on the other - ancient. But, in principle, they can find their buyers.

But something we started talking about desktops, it would be time to switch to mobile processors, because there are also a lot of strange "features" here.

Intel Celeron N3050 and N3350 - worse than Atom for the same money

For some reason, branded laptop manufacturers have one trick - we put Celeron and Pentium in netbooks / laptops, and Atom in tablets. It would seem that everything is correct, Celeron should be better than Atom, but no - Intel thinks differently: the architecture of these processors is similar, but Atom has 4 computing cores, when Celeron has only 2. Taking into account that we are considering the lowest -level (10-15 thousand rubles), a couple of cores will not be superfluous here, and if notebooks on Celeron may well start to freeze with 3-4 tabs in Chrome, Atom will be quite capable of simultaneously surfing and watching a PiP movie. And given the fact that for $ 150 you can simply remain silent about the quality of branded netbooks - it makes sense to take a solution from any Digma or iRu, but with Atom, and get seriously better performance for the same money.

Intel Core i3-6006U and Pentium 4405U - i3 worse than Pentium


After Atom, which is better than Celeron, it would seem that it is much worse. However, they knocked on the bottom - the i3-6006U, which is quite massive in the segment of 18-25 thousand rubles ... is worse than its counterpart in the same segment, but from the Pentium mill! Let's take a closer look at these processors: both have 2 cores and 4 threads, the same instruction set, but the Pentium has a 100 MHz higher frequency, but the integrated graphics are twice as bad: HD 510 versus HD 520 in i3. It would seem that 100 MHz frequency (+ 5%) will definitely not outweigh twice the worst graphics, but there are two nuances:

1. If a laptop has discrete graphics (and often it is - this is an Nvidia GT 920M), then it makes no difference to integrated graphics - it will be discrete graphics that will work in games, so a slightly higher-frequency Pentium is better here.
2. If a person chooses a laptop without discrete graphics, then he does not need games, and both integrated video cards cope with GUI rendering and playback, including 1080p60, that is, again, there is no point in taking i3.

AMD mobile processors - Intel won the war

The fact that AMD did not really update its mobile processors for a couple of years, and Intel, even in low-voltage solutions, increased the number of cores to 4, led to the fact that it simply does not make sense to buy laptops with AMD processors - analogs on Intel processors will be more productive. and more autonomous. Yes, the "reds" do not want to lose the mobile market, and they are actively making mobile Ryzen, but so far the only thing on the Internet is a couple of tests, where processors from AMD again do not perform in the best light. Of course, when they come out, everything may change, but so far Intel reigns in the mobile segment. You can read more about this.

What's the bottom line? And in the end, the same confusion and hesitation as with video cards - there are excellent solutions, there are good ones, and there are those at the sight of which you think - and what was the manufacturer guided by when releasing of this?! But, what pleases me is that the processor market has seriously moved lately, and mainly thanks to AMD: Intel rolled out 6-core desktop processors in response to 8-core Ryzen, the number of cores in the same lines has also increased in the mobile segment. So those who wanted to upgrade or build a new PC - IMHO, it's time to get started.

Around the beginning of the school year and during it the need for new computers increases, and many will ask the question - which processor is better for games?

To answer this question, let's look at the variety of modern models, and by what parameters and criteria a chip is generally chosen for modern games.

PC processor price

When assembling a gaming computer, the main thing is not the processor, but the video card, the main expenses will be on it. You can naturally spend money and collect from all the best, but such a system unit will be very expensive, which is not available to everyone.

If you don't want to spend a lot, but get a decent enough gaming PC, you will have to save on something. One of the options is to save on the processor, which does not always play such a decisive role in the speed of toys.

For example, Intel processors of the i3, i5, i7, i9 families differ in price, but all four can be used in gaming systems. The best processor for games is of course the i9 series, but the price of the youngest of them starts at $ 1000 (60,000 rubles). Another thing is the i3, which costs several times cheaper - $ 150 (9,000 rubles), but it can also be installed in a gaming computer.

If you choose the AMD platform, it has traditionally always cost less than Intel. The younger version of the top-end Ryzen Threadripper 1920X processor, which is on par with the most powerful Intel chips in performance, will cost $ 800 (48,000 rubles), which is already cheaper. If you choose the younger AMD Ryzen 3 1200, then the price for it is only $ 110, and yes, it can also be used for a gaming computer.

This range of prices raises many questions, which we will try to answer below.

Which gaming processor should you choose?

Let's divide all the processors listed below into some subgroups: premium, fast and good. The latter will be the best option when the budget is not very large. The premium ones, of course, are very productive, but they are designed for buyers who often want to highlight their high social status.

Premium processors

Fast processors

Good processors

There are many models of processors that can be used in a gaming computer. We chose purely for our own subjective reasons. This does not mean that you cannot use even cheaper and low-performance chips, but if you want to unleash the full potential of a gaming video card, then we choose at least from the last four.

Game Processor Specifications 2017

Now let's look a little at some of the main characteristics and nuances by which you should choose a gaming processor. Today's latest generation chips like AMD Ryzen are equipped with more advanced architecture to deliver never-before-seen multiprocessing and multithreading, along with intelligent features that self-optimize power. Although not all games or applications may reveal all these possibilities, everything is moving in this direction. Consider the main selection criteria.

Frequency

This is one of the parameters by which a processor is most often chosen for gaming. Usually, something below 2.8 GHz is not considered a game processor, so we try to select it in the 3-4 GHz range. The fact that above this threshold is usually overclocked "stones" for overlocking. Such models have an unlocked multiplier and can significantly increase the frequency, provided there is good cooling. Both Intel and AMD often refer to them with the letters K and X, for example, we have the Intel Core i7-7700K on our list.

True, most modern processors independently adjust the frequency within certain limits (2.9-3.9 GHz), if required by the task being performed. The Intel Core i7-7700T processor on our list is just that.

Kernels and threads

More and more modern games require a minimum of 4 cores (GTA V, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Far Cry 4 or Assassin's Creed Unity) to deliver acceptable performance when paired with your gaming graphics card. True, multicore does not always affect performance; multithreading often plays a key role. All modern Intel processors support Hyper-Threading Technology, which realizes twice the number of threads in relation to the cores for better performance. The new AMD Razen are also equipped with similar technology. All processors with such parameters can be safely written into gaming ones.

Cache

The size of the cache, as a rule, does not affect the performance in games, but it will be noticeable if you run many programs at the same time or, like crazy surfing the Internet, opening many tabs at the same time. It is definitely impossible to exclude this parameter in the rapidly developing world of technologies. Some processors like the premium AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X are equipped with a huge amount of this memory (38 MB in total). There are caches of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd level.

Intel or AMD?

Traditionally, AMD processors have always been cheaper than their competitor Intel, and did not have the same performance capabilities, so they were more often bought because of their budget. However, the latest generation of AMD Ryzen, thanks to the introduction of the latest technologies (including intelligent ones), even bypassed many models of Intel chips. This is despite the fact that their prices are much cheaper.

The time has passed when AMD lagged behind Intel, now the company is gaining more and more momentum and is likely to bypass its eminent brother. Moreover, over the past few years, the latter has not offered anything fundamentally new.

Which processor should you choose for 4K gaming?

Although many top video cards support 4K resolution, only creating a system of two or even three video cards will allow you to get a fairly acceptable speed (at least 60 FPS) at maximum settings. Accordingly, such a configuration requires a sufficiently powerful central processor.

For these purposes, choose from fast processors, and better premium ones. Expensive, yes, but you get a completely different UHD gaming experience.

Which processor is right for VR games?

To comfortably use a VR headset, any chip from the good processors section is enough. Even expensive headsets deliver no more than Full HD resolution, which can handle any mid-range gaming graphics card, providing good performance and high frame rates (FPS).

If you can get an expensive VR headset like the HTC Vive or PlayStation VR, you can probably build a very decent system unit with an expensive processor.

Conclusion

So which processor should you choose for gaming? If you are not tight-lipped and want to surprise your friends and pamper your self, then the answer is obvious. And if your budget is small, but you really want to play with comfort, then choose a processor with at least 4 threads. An Intel Core i3-7320 from our list or AMD Ryzen 3 1300X will do. But it is better to install Intel Core i5-7600, which will be the best option with a small margin for the future, because the gaming industry offers more and more interesting games that require high power.

This article presents only the best AMD processors in 2017.

If you do not want to independently understand all the characteristics of each processor model or are not sure that you can choose the best option, take a look at our CPU rating from AMD.

A good processor is the main indicator of the power and speed of your PC. AMD is one of the leaders in the processor market. AMD produces the following types of processors:

• Cpu - central computing units
• GPU - a separate device that renders video. Often used in gaming computers to reduce the load on the central unit and to provide better video quality;
• APU - central processors with built-in video accelerator. They are also called hybrid, because such a component is a combination of the central and graphics processor of a PC in one crystal.

№5 - Athlon X4 860 K

The AMD Athlon line is designed for Socket FM2 +. The X4 860K is the best and most powerful model of the entire series, which comes with three processors:

• Athlon X4 860K;
• Athlon X4840;
• Athlon X2

Figure 2 - Athlon X4 860K Hardware Product Package

The Athlon family is designed for desktop personal computers. All models in the line are distinguished by good multithreading. The best results in the Athlon group were shown by the X4 860K.

The first detail to be noted is support for a virtually silent cooler that draws no more than 95W along with quiet operation and no performance loss. If the processor has been overclocked using special programs, an increase in the noise in the operation of the cooling system may be observed.

Main characteristics:

• Family: Athlon X4;
• The number of processor cores: 4;
• Clock frequency - 3.1 MHz;
• There is no unlocked multiplier;
• Core type: Kaveri;
• Estimated cost: $ 50.

There is no integrated graphics in the CPU. This means that it is not recommended for use in gaming PCs, because the main load generated by games will go exactly to the processor (unless the user is using an additional graphics CPU). The X4 860K processor can only support fast general-purpose systems.

CPU testing was done using the AIDA64 utility. Overall, the model performs well for a mid-range processor. If you're looking for a low-cost, multitasking CPU for your home computer, the Athlon X4 860K is one of the options.

Fig. 3 - testing Athlon X4 860K

No. 4 - AMDFx-6300

AMD's FX-6300 is a Piledriver based CPU. Processors with such an architecture have already become worthy competitors to new products from Intel. All processors from AMD FX group have excellent overclocking potential.

FX-6300 specifications:

• Series: FX-Series;
• Supported Socket: Socket AM3 +;
• Number of cores: 6;
• No integrated graphics
• The clock frequency is 3.5 MHz;
• Number of contacts: 938;
• The average cost of the model is $ 85.

A characteristic feature of the processor is its flexibility. The clock frequency declared by the developer is 3.5 MHz, which is a rather mediocre indicator among processors for personal computers. However, this CPU is capable of overclocking up to 4.1 MHz.

Fig. 4 - box of devices of the FX series from AMD

Acceleration of work occurs during intense loads. More often during video rendering or playing games. It should be noted that this CPU model is equipped with a dual channel memory controller.

The processor speed tests were carried out in Just Cause 2. The final results showed that the Athlon X4 860K supports the maximum graphics resolution at 1920 x 1200 pixels.

The computer also used an integrated GTX 580 graphics card. In the figure below, you can see a comparison analysis of performance and other processors that were tested with identical hardware and software conditions.

Fig. 5 - Athlon X4 860K test result

№3 - A10-7890 K

The A10-7890K is a hybrid CPU from AMD. Despite the announcement of the development of a fundamentally new technology and a generation of processors, AMD decided to release another model of the A10 line. The company is positioning this series of devices as a great choice for desktop PCs.

The A10-7890K is the best-in-class solution for playing online games. Of course, the graphics settings will have to be reduced, but as a result, you will get good performance without severe overheating of the PC hardware.

Figure 6 - Model A10-7890K Packaging

This processor has an integrated Radeon graphics unit that allows you to:

• Use online games and streaming without damaging the computer system;
• Stream all games from your Xbox One console. Requirement: Windows 10 installed;
• Improved graphics settings when playing dark movie scenes and during video editing.

The processor comes with a Wraith cooler, which features very quiet operation. Also, the cooler supports backlighting mode. Specifications A10-7890K:

• CPU family - A-Series;
• Clock frequency: 4.1 MHz;
• Connector type: Socket FM2 +;
• Number of cores: 4 cores;
• There is an unlocked multiplier;
• Number of contacts: 906;
• Estimated cost - $ 130.

The main plus of the A10-7890K is its improved interoperability with Windows 10.

The detailed characteristics of the processor are shown in the figure below:

Figure 7 - Detailed Specifications of APU A10-7890K

The results of testing the component with the standard test Cinebench R15:

Fig. 8 - Cinebench R15 benchmark result

As you can see, the tested component has surpassed some AMD models in the A-10 and Athlon line in its parameters. At the same time, the results obtained were not enough to surpass Intel analogs in terms of speed.

№2 - Ryzen 5 1600 X

The first two places in our TOP are occupied by models of the Ryzen line. It is in the past few years that the architecture of these processors has become a key one for Advanced Micro Devices Corporation. The presented Zen microarchitecture is gradually returning the manufacturer to its leading position in the market.

Ryzen 5 is a direct competitor to the Intel i5 processor group. The CPU is at its best in gaming systems. This is also stated by the CEO of AMD.

Specifications:

• AMD Ryzen 5 family;
• 6 cores;
• No integrated graphics;
• There is an unlocked multiplier;
• Clock frequency 3.6 MHz;
• Socket AM4;
• The cost is about $ 260.

Most 1600X modifications lack the native cooling system. Users will have to purchase this component separately. The base frequencies do not cross the established 3.6 MHz mark. When working in turbo mode (as a result of overclocking the processor), the clock frequency reaches 4.0 MHz.

All 5th Gen Ryzen models support SMT - Surface Mount Technology. Thus, the CPU can be easily mounted on the surface of the PCB without the need to cut parts of the component.

Figure 9 - Ryzen 5 Package

In the process of testing the CPU even with the most resource-intensive programs, the maximum CPU temperature did not exceed 58 degrees. , Test results:

Fig. 10 - test of the 1600X model

Together with a line of powerful digging CPUs, AMD also released a special firmware for their initial configuration - AGESA. The utility allows you to reconfigure memory to avoid delays and interruptions in work.

№1 - Ryzen7 1800X

The Ryzen 7 1800X is a great choice for building a powerful PC or for multi-tiered data server support.

AMD is currently developing another powerful member of the Ryzen family. In March 2017, the Ryzen 2000 X APU was announced and should go on sale by the end of the year.

Specifications:

• Family: AMD Ryzen 7;
• 8 cores;
• Clock frequency of 3.6 MHz with the possibility of overclocking to 4 MHz;
• Unlocked multiplier support;
• No support for integrated graphics;
• Average price - $ 480.

Figure 11 - Ryzen 7 1800X

1800X can simultaneously execute up to 16 streams of program code. The processor works with SMT multithreading technology. All Zen cores make efficient use of other hardware components in the computer. Increased throughput with support for three-level cache memory.

Comparison of the results of testing Ryzen 7 1800X versus competing models from Intel.

Figure 12 - Performance Comparison

Pros and cons of all processorsAMD

AMD products are cheaper than similar CPUs from Intel. All the models discussed above have the following advantages:

• Inexpensive cost ;
• Even the cheap processor segment shows good performance for computers of the "General Purpose" group;
• Support for different platforms. Users who have chosen AMD have no problems with checking the compatibility of the socket and the CPU. For example, socket AM2 + supports most AMD processors. Thus, you can quickly replace the hardware component and increase the performance of your PC by almost 100%;
• Multitasking support ... As the results of testing on different benchmarks show, the system under AMD control performs 3-5 tasks at once without any problems. From archiving dimensional files to downloading data and playing games. The launch of multiple processes does not cause the operating system to slow down;
• Stable operation of the OS ;
• User can set the voltage to the core CPU, regardless of the class of the installed motherboard.

Please note that the developer has provided a so-called "reserve capacity" in each processor model. This means that, regardless of the class of your CPU, you can overclock it by an average of 10% -20% using special software. We recommend using the Over Drive or Advanced Clock Calibration utility.

The negative sides of AMD products include the following:

• Sometimes users face incompatibility between games or video editing software and processor. This is due to the lack of popularity among AMD for developers. Most of the operating systems and software shells are designed for Intel;
• Consumes more power than Intel. That is why it is not advised to install AMD in laptops if the autonomy of the equipment is important to the user;
• Low frequency of the cache of the 2nd and 3rd levels.

Outcome

With every CPU model released, AMD has improved the component's performance. In 2017, Ryzen and FX series processors received positive feedback from users.

AMD processors can be a great value for money if you are looking for a part for basic PC work or for playing games at medium graphics settings.

Thematic videos:

All About AMD Processors / Which Processor Should You Choose?

For several decades now, the debate about which manufacturer's processors is better has been raging. Now the comparison of Intel and AMD processors is meaningless, since these companies cannot compete with the Russian MCST :). Elbrus is so good that it simply does not reach ordinary buyers, almost instantly being bought up by organizations. Ordinary users have to be content with Intel and AMD processors on the “outdated” X86 architecture. Of course, they cannot stand comparisons with MCST, but there is essentially nothing to choose from. Because of this, it doesn't hurt to figure it out which is better - AMD or Intel comparing them with each other.

Which is better for gaming: Intel or AMD?

Performance in games has become the main criterion for choosing a processor for ordinary users. Many people build a computer just for games. In principle, we have more people who like to play than people who like to work! =)))

The performance of any more or less modern 8-thread (not the core, but threads!) Processor is sufficient even for AAA projects. However, the models with less thread should not be discounted - in many cases they do a great job of playing games. Sometimes it is necessary for this. If the performance in games is limited by the capabilities of the video card (in the overwhelming majority of cases), the requirements for the processor are even lower. The main thing is that he does not give freezes and statters in games.

Still, which company's processors perform better in games? It is very difficult to unequivocally answer this question; ideally, one should always consider and compare specific models. In short, lower- and mid-range AMD processors are better than those of Intel. In addition, AMD processors are generally much better in terms of price / performance ratio. Intel is the undisputed leader in the highest price segment of desktop processors. Senior processors from this company have the highest absolute performance in games.

It's worth noting that gaming performance is not a measure of overall processor performance. So AMD Ryzen shows rather modest results in games, significantly lagging behind Intel. In rendering and some other tasks, AMD is better than Intel (if we consider processors of equal cost).

Intel vs AMD: which processor to choose for a laptop

Laptops, due to the requirements for high autonomy and low power consumption, get significantly weakened "stuffing". For them, the performance of the central processor and its energy efficiency are very important.

In terms of energy efficiency, modern AMD processors are the leader in the notebook market. Ryzen already has a smaller die than Intel processors. In 2019, AMD chips will begin to be produced according to the 7nm standard. This will further reduce their size, and therefore increase energy efficiency. But Intel cannot master the 10nm process technology in any way.

AMD-based laptops are also better in terms of price / performance ratio. The graphics built into its mobile processors are vastly superior to those from Intel. This provides a noticeable advantage, most pronounced in lower-end notebooks that do not have discrete graphics.

Intel mobile processors boast the highest absolute performance. The integrated GPU in them is rather weak compared to AMD. However, in the case of discrete graphics, this becomes unimportant.

Intel and AMD in 2019: Clash of the Titans

After AMD released its latest generation of processors based on Zen architecture in 2017, a new round of confrontation between “red” and “blue” began. AMD Ryzen proved to be such a successful product that Intel had to urgently increase the number of cores. The increase in performance in the 8th generation of Intel processors reached 50%, while in the previous 5 years the "blue" giant offered an average of + 5% in each new generation.

The addition of cores in the 8th generation Intel seemed small. In the second half of 2018, it released the 9th generation of its desktop processors, the flagship of which has 8 physical cores and 16 threads. This was a response to Ryzen 2 and possibly Ryzen 3 upcoming next year.

Intel is using marketing successfully. So the company spawned a new line of processors,. Also, at the presentation of its server processors, Intel emphasized that AMD Epyc did not have hardware support for AVX-512. By the way, there are literally a few applications supporting these instructions.

The confrontation between these titans affects all segments of the processor market. In the server market and at HEDT, both vendors offer solutions with more cores. For example, AMD's current flagship in the server market EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads. Already in solutions based on the next Zen 2 architecture, AMD will increase the number of physical cores to 64 for server processors. AMD's HEDT flagship, the Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX, has 32 physical cores. At this time, Intel's rival flagship, the Core i9-7980XE, has only 18 cores.

What do you think about this? Which processor would you buy and why? Please answer in the comments.

Have you read to the very end?

Was this helpful?

Not really

What exactly did you dislike? Was the article incomplete or false?
Write in comments and we promise to improve!