With Intel chips being faster, is AMD worth buying?

*SubZero* · 22-06-2012

I would ask about thoughts on Intel vs AMD and if AMD is worth buying since Intel is faster across chip product line.

AMD Bulldozer is slower than Phenom X4 even, while Intel chips keep getting slightly faster than their last set, and speed gain over AMD is increasing even more.

So would recommending AMD chip to anybody be good advice? Or would recommending Intel chips serve buyers better?

Thank you

**Kerry56** · 23-06-2012

I wouldn't recommend AMD at this point. Especially not for their Bulldozer line.

It is possible to find a good deal on the AMD Thuban 6 core cpus still. Just this week MicroCenter offered the 1045T with a motherboard for $100. But I think that deal has closed now.

If you work with software that can benefit from extra cores, the Thuban processors aren't too bad. I have one, and use it for H264 video encoding. But they are completely outclassed now by the Ivy Bridge Intel processors, and are slower by 25% or so for this particular type of encoding. And video encoding is one of Thuban's greatest strengths. It has a much worse showing in other types of processes.

The only reason I can see for recommending an AMD setup right now is if your budget simply won't accommodate buying an Intel based system.

*SubZero* · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerry56

I wouldn't recommend AMD at this point. Especially not for their Bulldozer line.

I have heard said that the forced include of onboard video for latest intel based boards is unwanted by many and seen as extra stuff not wanted to have to be paid for.

I would think to just disable that and use regular card. But I do not know if there would be resource allocation problem or conflict or anything.

I have 980x extreme but do not think I would pay for it again. It was a lot of extra money for not a lot of extra performance by comparison. I would rather see people put that extra money to a good video card, or monitor or more storage.

I do wish Intel did not cost so much more than AMD, but you get more performance for the money.

What chips would you think best for mid / upper class performance from intel (not extreme line, but others)?

**Kerry56** · 23-06-2012

If you can afford it, the i7 3770k is the chip to get.

But if hyperthreading isn't particularly important, the i5 3570k is much more affordable. This is the cpu that most interests me at the moment, though I've blown my computer money on a ssd this week, so any upgrade will have to wait a good while.

And of course, if you don't need the unlocked multiplier, you don't need the K versions of these chips.

*UTR* · 23-06-2012

It depends on how power hungry your software is and what you use your computer for. For most people the AMD chips are plenty fast. If you are a power user then go with Intel, If not, then put the money you save going with AMD in your pocket or towards other hardware.

**olyteddy** · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by SubZero

I have heard said that the forced include of onboard video for latest intel based boards is unwanted by many and seen as extra stuff not wanted to have to be paid for....

Intel's on-board video is more than just video. It can be used very nicely to offload processor intensive work like encoding and folding. I can transcode a 2 hour 720p video to AVC in about 20 minutes with the first gen (HD2000) version using around 15% processor.

*SubZero* · 23-06-2012

Thank you for replies

Is it not possible to buy Ivy Bridge MB without video on it?

Just 3770k, ram and normal without onboard video?

*SubZero* · 23-06-2012

dupe sorry

**Kerry56** · 23-06-2012

The Ivy Bridge cpus have the integrated video, its not on the motherboard itself.

*SubZero* · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerry56

The Ivy Bridge cpus have the integrated video, its not on the motherboard itself.

But motherboards have circuitry with connectors etc?

I would prefer option to have no integrated GPU on chip or board.

But I will tell just information to people and they can decide about video.

Intel is just faster than AMD so if you want good performance you just have to buy Intel over AMD if your tasks are above typical.

**Kerry56** · 23-06-2012

Yes, the motherboard will have the circuitry necessary to hook up your monitor or tv to the computer. They will normally have hdmi, dvi and d-sub connectors these days, maybe others like display port.

The motherboard manufacturers use the Intel chipsets, which have this capability. There isn't a way around having it on the motherboard. You can still use a separate video card of course.

*SubZero* · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerry56

Yes, the motherboard will have the circuitry necessary to hook up your monitor or tv to the computer. They will normally have hdmi, dvi and d-sub connectors these days, maybe others like display port.

The motherboard manufacturers use the Intel chipsets, which have this capability. There isn't a way around having it on the motherboard. You can still use a separate video card of course.

AMD chips do not do this, correct?

Is there a line of Intel that does not?

thank you

**olyteddy** · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by SubZero

AMD chips do not do this, correct?

Is there a line of Intel that does not?

thank you

Actually, AMD has the Llano a 'Fusion' part, so onchip video isn't exclusive to Intel. And there are lots of GPU-less Intel parts, including some Sandy Bridge parts http://www.guru3d.com/news/intel-shi...s-without-gpu/

**Kerry56** · 23-06-2012

Some AMD chips do have a combined cpu/gpu...they are called APU's. There are several series out, but the ones I've heard of are called Llano. But most AMD cpu's do not have this built in video.

Some of the Intel cpu's do not have integrated graphics. The i5 2450P Sandy Bridge, i5 2550K Sandy Bridge, and i5 Sandy Bridge 2380P are examples of this.
I don't know if there will be an Ivy Bridge without integrated graphics or not.

Edit: Olyteddy beat me to the punch.

**geno888** · 23-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by SubZero

But motherboards have circuitry with connectors etc?

I would prefer option to have no integrated GPU on chip or board.

But I will tell just information to people and they can decide about video.

Intel is just faster than AMD so if you want good performance you just have to buy Intel over AMD if your tasks are above typical.

Sorry if I misunderstood your question. Are you looking for an Ivy-Bridge board without video connectors?

For what I know (I could be wrong, I'm not sure at 100%), no board for Ivy Bridge CPUs is made without video connectors, because the manufacturer cannot know if the user want use or not the integrated GPU.

The video output connectors on latest Intel boards are there only if you use the integrated GPU (as said Kerry, the GPU is inside the processor, not in the mainboard).

If you don't want use the integrated GPU, you can install a discrete VGA. Then, the onboard video connectors are disabled by BIOS.

Regarding AMD CPUs, there is another feature that was not discussed here: the power consumption. These processors are all high power, and other than consuming more than Ivy Bridge, they are also producing a lot more heat, so they require larger coolers. This is not something that should be dismissed, because (at least in my zone) with hot weather you can melt the processor

**olyteddy** · 23-06-2012

You could also look at the Intel inclusion of graphics like we did at math co-processors back in the 386, 386SX and 486 days. Folks back then pooh-poohed the inclusion of a math co-processor but try to find a chip without one these days...

*debro* · 24-06-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geno

Regarding AMD CPUs, there is another feature that was not discussed here: the power consumption. These processors are all high power, and other than consuming more than Ivy Bridge, they are also producing a lot more heat, so they require larger coolers. This is not something that should be dismissed, because (at least in my zone) with hot weather you can melt the processor

Amd E series low power slaughter intels low power atm series in price, 3D compute, price and power.

I couldn't recommend amd's mainstream series currently., The i3 is more than suitable for most consumers, certainly with quicksync, and the i5 which are also reasonably cost effective, typically outperform amd's higher end series at similar cost and much loweer power.

*SubZero* · 28-06-2012

I have found some Fatality board for Intel chips to have no onboard video. I would recommend that to people. i7-3770k chip will work on such a board. I believe that and the dedicated USB Mouse port, which makeup for losing dedicated PS2 port, is also plus for that board.

Current AMD 4100-8150 are no faster than Phenom II X4 975, or 965 clocked to 3.6ghz. In fact, slower on per mhz basis, so given AMD is some 15-25% slower than 3770k, I would not recommend.

From personal experience I know that to buy XMP approved RAM for Intel (Kensington has good XMP series) solves many possible problems, so I think that also is good to recommend.

Thank you for the information. Tips here and there help me to find search phrases that lead me to what I can learn from. I am grateful for the assistance.

**geno888** · 28-06-2012

You're welcome

*Zathros* · 01-07-2012

I just built a cheapo system. I had two computers die within two months. Both were AMD's. These machines lasted almost 7 years (motherboard and CPU).

I purchased an AMD Phenom II 965 Black Edition (Deneb 45nm) for around $100 bucks, brand new, and stuck it in an Asus M5A97 that was even cheaper. The warranties were 3 years each, included. Only 8 G Single channel DDR3 @668MHz. The video card blows, short on cash, only a AMD Radeon HD6600 2 SATA hard drives totaling 2.5 Terabyte's. This one has USB 3.0

I do a lot of CAD. This machines, and the one i built last month, virtually identical except with a MSI 870-G45 board (12G's of Ram)

These machines run Rhino3D 4.0, at maximum settings really excellently. I have installed this same programs on friends machines costing 3 to 4 times, if not more, and the difference isn;'t just there, not enough to justify the price. Amazingly, these guys said the same thing. I teach them CAD.

I think this is the software's inability to use all the cores. This NURBs modeling program is an excellent program. I also have AutoDesk, Photoshop CS3 and CS5 and again, these machines are great. I know they are "old', not the latest and greatest, but, with dual 24' monitors on each, and with the money I saved, I was able to get my son an Acer AMD Quad Core laptop, it is not a APU, this is a great Laptop, 512 mbs of video ram.. The list was $650, I got it for $499 from Tigerdirect.com. It was below their cost, a loss leader. It isn't the first time they have rewarded me for being a long time customer, though I also buy from NewEgg and Amazon. The Laptop was for my 12 year old, the school system told us two weeks in advance of this "new" requirement. So, I have 3 computers, 2 PCs and 1 Laptop, all new, for the price that some people have paid for one PC. AMD's have their place, but this last generation of products from them has only been extremely disappointing. I was lucky to find these Phenom's as they are getting harder to find. The single biggest upgrades will be faster hard drives, and better video cards. I imagine I will be running these for a long time. Maybe, AMD will have done something by then. If not, I will go Intel. I like to support underdog companies. I have made out. AMD has done well by me. I have not overclocked my AMD's. I have not had to. A couple of my models are attached. These are models I have built in paper, none are for sale. The Bi-Plane is for a client. Rotating models like this are a good test for a computer. These files sometimes have four or five or the models within one file. These are all designed and unrolled at 1/50th scale using Rhino3D 4.0. The models are my designs of the real craft based on blueprints of the aircraft. A friend from Russian sent me the A90 Ekranoplan blueprints. That was risky for him. I have never seen the files I have on the internet. A great benefit of having associates around the world! The models are all works in progress.

There are still some great AMD processors out there, and if one is careful, a great computer that will serve the needs of 90% of the population can be served (a number I pulled from the air), very inexpensively. but with quality. IMHO.

*SubZero* · 10-07-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zathros

I just built a cheapo system. I had two computers die within two months. Both were AMD's. These machines lasted almost 7 years (motherboard and CPU).

I purchased an AMD Phenom II 965 Black Edition (Deneb 45nm) for around $100 bucks, brand new, and stuck it in an Asus M5A97 that was even cheaper. The warranties were 3 years each, included. Only 8 G Single channel DDR3 @668MHz. The video card blows, short on cash, only a AMD Radeon HD6600 2 SATA hard drives totaling 2.5 Terabyte's. This one has USB 3.0

I do a lot of CAD. This machines, and the one i built last month, virtually identical except with a MSI 870-G45 board (12G's of Ram)

Good post with much information. Thank you.

I used to do much CAD and Bryce and Hash Animation Master work in the old days and find that the single biggest boost seem to be with Windows 7 in 64 bit because apps can access more memory if they are native 64 bit.

I have gained more from larger memory than with multi-core I feel.

The primary reason I finally upgrade to Windows 7 is for 64 bit. I have one machine with 24 gig of triple channel, one machine with 16 gb regular AMD and one machine (laptop) with 16 gb on regular Intel. I can have video, audio and render apps all run at the same time and be very productive compared to before. It is the first 64 bit version of Windows that I have found to work well with different kind of hardware and software. XP 64 bit I had problems and with Vista also. So that is why I stuck with XP 32 bit for so long. Now making the move to Windows 7 64 bit on all but 2 machine, which I will phase out by 2014 when support stops.

Thanks for sharing renders. It brings back memory of old days.

*Zathros* · 11-07-2012

I actually didn't think anyone had looked at these! I just got Bryce, as they had a promotion last year and gave it away!

As soon as I can scrape up cash, two new videos cards, then, better ran, but I really don't need it, so it could go into my MG!!

The renders I posted all unfold and I have built these into paper models.

ChristineBCW · 11-07-2012

We still push a lot of AMDs out for smaller 4-5 disk RAID systems because Intel hasn't discovered SATA3 yet. We've been waiting for a couple of years, but nope...

**geno888** · 11-07-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristineBCW

We still push a lot of AMDs out for smaller 4-5 disk RAID systems because Intel hasn't discovered SATA3 yet. We've been waiting for a couple of years, but nope...

Building a RAID system with Intel CPU is not problem at all. Many NAS available in the market use Atom CPUs.

However, for what I know the true RAID system (i.e. with a dedicated chip onboard and not the software RAID used in most systems) are not Intel nor AMD

ChristineBCW · 11-07-2012

It's not a problem unless you want faster HDDs, and then Intel Desktops are stuck in a SATA2 rut for four years now. AMD delivered all-SATA3 support two and a half years ago.

The newest Intel X79s are still stuck with "native support for 4 SATA2s and 2 SATA3s." The LGA 2011s keep that low tradition going, too.

I don't understand this long-time preference to keep the historic bottleneck mired back in SATA2 limits.

22-06-2012	#1
SubZero MyCE Resident Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 543	With Intel chips being faster, is AMD worth buying? I would ask about thoughts on Intel vs AMD and if AMD is worth buying since Intel is faster across chip product line. AMD Bulldozer is slower than Phenom X4 even, while Intel chips keep getting slightly faster than their last set, and speed gain over AMD is increasing even more. So would recommending AMD chip to anybody be good advice? Or would recommending Intel chips serve buyers better? Thank you

23-06-2012	#2
Kerry56 Administrator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: West Texas Posts: 14,411	I wouldn't recommend AMD at this point. Especially not for their Bulldozer line. It is possible to find a good deal on the AMD Thuban 6 core cpus still. Just this week MicroCenter offered the 1045T with a motherboard for $100. But I think that deal has closed now. If you work with software that can benefit from extra cores, the Thuban processors aren't too bad. I have one, and use it for H264 video encoding. But they are completely outclassed now by the Ivy Bridge Intel processors, and are slower by 25% or so for this particular type of encoding. And video encoding is one of Thuban's greatest strengths. It has a much worse showing in other types of processes. The only reason I can see for recommending an AMD setup right now is if your budget simply won't accommodate buying an Intel based system. __________________ Basic Guide for BD Rebuilder BD Rebuilder Guide for MP4 or MKV conversion AVStoDVD Guide

23-06-2012	#4
Kerry56 Administrator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: West Texas Posts: 14,411	If you can afford it, the i7 3770k is the chip to get. But if hyperthreading isn't particularly important, the i5 3570k is much more affordable. This is the cpu that most interests me at the moment, though I've blown my computer money on a ssd this week, so any upgrade will have to wait a good while. And of course, if you don't need the unlocked multiplier, you don't need the K versions of these chips. __________________ Basic Guide for BD Rebuilder BD Rebuilder Guide for MP4 or MKV conversion AVStoDVD Guide

23-06-2012	#9
Kerry56 Administrator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: West Texas Posts: 14,411	The Ivy Bridge cpus have the integrated video, its not on the motherboard itself. __________________ Basic Guide for BD Rebuilder BD Rebuilder Guide for MP4 or MKV conversion AVStoDVD Guide

23-06-2012	#11
Kerry56 Administrator Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: West Texas Posts: 14,411	Yes, the motherboard will have the circuitry necessary to hook up your monitor or tv to the computer. They will normally have hdmi, dvi and d-sub connectors these days, maybe others like display port. The motherboard manufacturers use the Intel chipsets, which have this capability. There isn't a way around having it on the motherboard. You can still use a separate video card of course. __________________ Basic Guide for BD Rebuilder BD Rebuilder Guide for MP4 or MKV conversion AVStoDVD Guide

Today
Mr. Adbot Register to remove me Join Date: Today Location: Myce HQ Posts: Zillions

Today
Adbot Always the best offers Join Date: Today Location: Myce HQ Posts: Zillions

23-06-2012	#5
UTR MyCE Resident Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,877	It depends on how power hungry your software is and what you use your computer for. For most people the AMD chips are plenty fast. If you are a power user then go with Intel, If not, then put the money you save going with AMD in your pocket or towards other hardware.

23-06-2012	#16
olyteddy Senior Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In the present, the past was so long ago... Posts: 6,564	You could also look at the Intel inclusion of graphics like we did at math co-processors back in the 386, 386SX and 486 days. Folks back then pooh-poohed the inclusion of a math co-processor but try to find a chip without one these days... __________________ It's been at least 20 weeks since I had a sig...

28-06-2012	#18
SubZero MyCE Resident Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 543	I have found some Fatality board for Intel chips to have no onboard video. I would recommend that to people. i7-3770k chip will work on such a board. I believe that and the dedicated USB Mouse port, which makeup for losing dedicated PS2 port, is also plus for that board. Current AMD 4100-8150 are no faster than Phenom II X4 975, or 965 clocked to 3.6ghz. In fact, slower on per mhz basis, so given AMD is some 15-25% slower than 3770k, I would not recommend. From personal experience I know that to buy XMP approved RAM for Intel (Kensington has good XMP series) solves many possible problems, so I think that also is good to recommend. Thank you for the information. Tips here and there help me to find search phrases that lead me to what I can learn from. I am grateful for the assistance.

28-06-2012	#19
geno888 Senior Moderator, Editor and Guru Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Italy Posts: 29,213	You're welcome __________________ Click here or here to download latest version of CD-DVD Speed Click here to read more about DMA User guide for CD-DVD Speed: English version - Versione Italiana User guide for ImgBurn in BUILD mode English version - Italian version Please do not ask questions via PM. Post in the forum instead. Thanks Per favore, non chiedete consigli o suggerimenti tramite PM. Usate invece il forum (che serve proprio per questo). KTPHTT

11-07-2012	#22
Zathros MyCE Resident Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Somewhere Out there Posts: 1,593	I actually didn't think anyone had looked at these! I just got Bryce, as they had a promotion last year and gave it away! As soon as I can scrape up cash, two new videos cards, then, better ran, but I really don't need it, so it could go into my MG!! The renders I posted all unfold and I have built these into paper models.

11-07-2012	#23
ChristineBCW MyCE Die Hard Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: USA-Canada Posts: 1,298	We still push a lot of AMDs out for smaller 4-5 disk RAID systems because Intel hasn't discovered SATA3 yet. We've been waiting for a couple of years, but nope...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
AMD Phenom II X2 560 Black Edition vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8600 vs Intel Core i5-680 vs Intel Core i3-550	RABG	Newbie Forum	3	19-11-2010 17:24
A peek at faster Power6, Cell chips	platinumsword	Latest News Headlines	1	30-12-2006 23:27
AMD chips can't do LightScribe!	Syzygy	Nero & InCD	8	28-05-2005 01:09
AMD To Demonstrate Dual-Core Chips	Womble	Latest News Headlines	10	04-09-2004 20:45
Amd Sledgehammer VS Intel Itanium (Amd is gonna screw up intels ass)	Mattel007	Living Room	18	03-03-2000 15:47