home » Entertainment » Why amd is worse than intel. Intel or AMD is my opinion. The most productive AMD socket

Why amd is worse than intel. Intel or AMD is my opinion. The most productive AMD socket

I am often asked which processor is better? Or which processor to buy? What to rip out Intel or AMD? This is what processor to choose and will be discussed today.

Why do sophisticated users and programmers choose an Intel processor as part of a computer and laptop running a Windows class operating system? And not only computers with Windows, but also under Linux prefer to choose a processor from Intel, and not in vain.

AMD is not bad at producing processors for embedded systems, and graphics accelerators are not rarely based on AMD's processor products. However, with processors for computers, AMD is clearly unlucky as the processor from Intel took root there.

In addition to these two firms that survived and survived in the market, processors for computers were produced by other companies. It is not in vain that the processor from Intel has become a recognized trendsetter, and AMD got the second place of honor. After all, the rest of the firms dropped out of the struggle for leadership, and went into other niches or completely left the market of central processing units for computer systems. So AMD is not having such a terrible fate.

Choosing a processor from Intel, computer users try to insure themselves against minor problems that constantly accompany systems with the main crystal - an AMD processor. Operating systems have an important component of abstracting hardware from the runtime environment. This is the notorious, so-called hardware abstraction level (HAL) service.

When it comes to software compatibility issues with hardware, Intel's processor has a better chance and a leading position. De facto, it can be assumed that the vast majority of software systems are focused on the Intel processor. Therefore, other systems are forced to work in the so-called compatibility mode, which affects the performance of the systems and the stability of the work in general.

It should come as no surprise that systems that do not include an Intel processor are more likely to experience fatal failures. However, not only can an Intel processor perform well in most applications and applications, but AMD has complex, hidden issues that make any Intel processor slightly more expensive than its comparable counterpart. You can guess that the Intel processor is better debugged and more stable. Has a complete automatic system decline clock frequency when overheating, only the processor from Intel. It is very difficult to track episodic errors that occur in application systems, so we can judge that the Intel processor is better debugged and practically does not contain white spots, which cannot be said about AMD brothers.

The financial resources invested in the created Intel processor really pay off in practice. Catching up is always more difficult than being a leader and progressively moving towards new achievements, setting the pace of innovative development. This is how the Intel processor gains the well-deserved recognition.

Hello everyone. Let's talk today about which processor is better than Intel or AMD. I always try to take a sober view of the world, so to speak, and that's why I won't write today, saying Intel is good, and AMD is bullshit and stuff like that. Let's just compare some points and we will understand that each company has its own minuses and pluses. Well, I'll write what I personally think, I'll say right away, I don't want to offend anyone, I'm talking about those who like AMD!

So what do we know about Intel? We know that this is a serious company and it makes serious devices, it can be both processors and SSD drives, well, and other devices. Intel processors are much more productive than AMD in tests, but at the same time they are more expensive. AMD, in turn, are cheaper, less productive, but in all respects they are superior to processors from Intel, just some miracles.

Such a small moment, believe me, well, just believe me that a 4-core Intel processor SIMPLY SO costs more than an 8-core one from AMD! Well, he can't just cost more! And to understand this, you need to compare it yourself! This is purely my opinion!

As I personally think, Intel simply has more high-tech processors, yes, it sounds crazy, but I can explain it this way. AMD makes more mundane processors, so to speak, available to the people. But why this is so, I cannot understand why Intel is SO far ahead of AMD .. How much? Well, look, the 4-core Core i7 from Intel is more powerful than the 8-core from AMD, how can this be? There is clearly something wrong in the sense that companies' technologies, to put it mildly, are at very different levels. And I don't believe that fools work at AMD!

With the release of socket 1151 from Intel, where the processes have become even more powerful, I don't even know what AMD should do. The joke is simply that maybe I'm stupid, but I don't see any reason to take AMD at all, and at the same time I don't want to offend anyone, I just write stupidly as it is!

Let me write in a little more detail why you shouldn't take AMD. Logically, nothing personal guys! So let's take the AMD FX-8300 processor as an example, as for me, this is the best processor from AMD in terms of price / quality. So what do we have here? This frequency is 3.3 GHz (4.2 GHz in Turbo CORE mode), 8 cores (!), 8 MB of L3 cache and 8 MB of L2 cache (if I understand correctly), an unlocked multiplier (that is, you can overclock), there is no graphics core (in principle, not so important), the TDP is 95 watts, which in principle is not so small. Its price is about $ 120, well, it's about, this price is just here in our local store

Well, what can I say about AMD FX-8300? This is a great percentage for the price! 8 cores for $ 120, this is just fine, but as you understand, nothing happens just like that, and Intel with two cores, but 4 threads, also costs about that much, well, maybe a little cheaper. That is, 2 Intel cores are about the same as 8 AMD cores, and here I have a question, what is this in general, what is this nonsense?

And what do I mean by the Intel processor? But which one is Intel Core i3-4160. What do we have here? These are two cores of 3.6 GHz each (there is no Turbo Boost technology), integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4400), 3 MB cache of the third level, a locked multiplier (alas, you cannot overclock), TDP 54 Watt. In terms of characteristics, this percentage is much worse than AMD FX-8300. And what is in practice? I won’t lie, I haven’t tested it, but I’m sure that you need to know the limit and you know, I don’t believe that AMD FX-8300 will be weaker than i3-4160. All the same, eight cores against two. But I don't mean that the FX-8300 will be much more powerful. If you overclock it, then yes, it will be more powerful for sure, maybe even much! But one Intel core is still much more powerful than one AMD core, even if it is overclocked. Well, if we compare AMD FX-8300 with Core i5, especially if it is the 1151th socket, then it makes no sense: 4 i5 cores will definitely be more powerful than AMD FX-8300, probably even decently more powerful ..

Yes, I agree with you that maybe it makes sense to take AMD percentages for overclocking, overclock it, and then perhaps you will get some kind of boost. But at the same time, keep in mind that the percentage will then be heated much more, so you need good cooling, and this is also money. And the power supply is needed a little more powerful, well, that's in theory. The motherboard should be of high quality, because the percent will consume decent energy in overclocking. Yes, all this is good, except for the electricity bills will be higher. All this is especially noticeable if you play games every day for many hours.

But most importantly, you know what? So you buy a cool motherboard for AMD, so to speak, you will assemble a cool computer. You will somehow put the last processor on it, well, that is, not the last, but the most powerful in the lineup. By the way, this percentage is really very powerful, there is a frequency under 5 GHz, the TDP there is simply prohibitive, that is, electricity will already eat such a percentage very noticeably. And the price for cooling for such a processor will also be healthy. That is, I don't really see the point in such a process, yes, it is top-end, really powerful, but damn it, why is this top-end 8-core percent much cheaper than a four-core Core i7? Strange, isn't it? That is, in the end, the maximum possible percentage that you can deliver from AMD, it will still lose to the Core i7, so for the future, I advise you to take Intel

In general, guys, these were all thoughts out loud, I don't want to offend anyone, I myself wanted an 8-core processor, so I wanted exactly 8 cores, and that's why I thought to take the FX-8300. But at the last moment he changed his mind and took a percentage from Intel. But to be honest, I hope that the time will come and AMD will come up with something to make their processes really become more powerful and better, and if the price is also lower than that of Intel, it will be just a bomb ... But will it be so .. Eh, this is still unknown ...

That's all the guys, I'm sorry if I wrote something wrong, but I hope that more or less you understood everything here, and if something is wrong, then I'm sorry! Good luck in life and that everything is good for you

01.12.2016

Introduction

June 2018 clearly did not work for Brian Krzhanich. He lost his job, and the whole world, including his wife, learned that he, in Intel terminology, allowed himself "fraternization" (fraternization) with another employee. At the same time, the company did not even specify with which gender the fraternization took place.

Simultaneously with the official statement, Mr. Krzhanich was promptly dismissed from his post as CEO. Of course, one can only sympathize with Krzhanich: at 58 he was left without work, and even alone with three women (his wife and two daughters), who will have to explain what he did there at work, with whom he “fraternized” and where he is going to work and take money for college daughters.

Brian Krzhanich

Intel is doubly sorry: only after 35 years of joint work, they found out what kind of snake, which does not respect the company's eternal values, was warmed on the chest.

CNBS reports that fraternisations were once in the past, but it is only now that the company is clearly facing one of the biggest crises in its history.

If we were living in a cynical capitalist world in which businesses exist to make money, we would probably think that the CEO from Brian Krzhanich was so-so. After all, no one will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and all the stories with fraternization would be crushed at the first sound. However, fortunately, now is the era of universal tolerance and social responsibility. And unexpectedly emerging history and failures in the market are, in accordance with the postulate of Occam's razor, just a coincidence.

I suggest leaving speculation about fraternization and talking about how Intel, perhaps for the first time in its history, found itself in a really difficult situation.

A bit of history

You may not have paid attention, but in recent years, many large companies are faced with a dilemma: the old path leads to the exit from the market, and new paths have not yet been trodden, no compasses and maps have been invented, and there is uncharted territory ahead. Everyone responds to these challenges differently. The most striking examples are how Microsoft decorated Windows and how IBM, after having laid a straw and bought the corresponding division from PricewaterhouseCooper for $ 3.5 billion, took up consulting. The transition to new areas of business was successful, and in 2017 the structure of $ 79 billion in revenue looked like this:

As you can see, cloud and infrastructure technologies for business are in the first place. On the second - developments in the field of artificial intelligence. IBM trains Watson heavily for decision making in business and medicine. But mainframes (that is, "hardware"), which at one time were the main sphere of the company, occupy only 10%. Interestingly, despite the fact that 10 years have passed since the change of direction, in the eyes of ordinary people, IBM is still an "iron" company.

International Business Machines were discussed for a reason, since with some degree of convention we can say that it was IBM that gave Intel growth opportunities, and also became the reason for the creation of its main "sworn" competitor - Advanced Micro Devices, or AMD.

In the early days of computer engineering, IBM donated many technologies to third-party developers to maximize concentration on the essence of the business. Most of all, two companies were delighted. The first one is Microsoft, because they finally found where to insert a floppy disk with MS-DOS. More than 5% of our audience are girls under 24 years old, who probably did not catch this miracle. For them, I will explain, MS-DOS is operating system (OS) with command line and the black screen that was before Windows. Thanks to his collaboration with IBM, Bill Gates managed to ensure his prosperity for many years, as well as to win the operating system market.

The second company to catch its luck was Intel. However, in the case of Intel, IBM decided to play it safe: it is still much easier to face a shortage of processors than a shortage of an operating system that can always be replicated. IBM insisted that Intel share knowledge and license another vendor to its liking. With a sour face, Intel chose AMD and reluctantly told first about the 8086 processor, and then with a heavy sigh and about the 286. For girls, I will explain that the 286th is very important, since it laid the foundation for the future - the continuity of the next generations.

For a long time, AMD acted as a poor relative. Intel became so angry that it was forced to share knowledge that it began pursuing an aggressive strategy of focusing on innovation in an effort to disprove Moore's Law, which states that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every 24 months. The company rattled its weapons enthusiastically and threatened that the law would triumph in 18 months. What was important for consumers was that there was a qualitative breakthrough. Processors 386, 486, and then various generations of Pentiums were rapidly rolling out to the market. AMD looked at this quietly, analyzed the new developments of a competitor, puffed, copied and reproduced, after which it offered its versions, which were worse in all respects, but at times a little cheaper.

However, in the early 2000s, AMD felt that it seemed to begin to understand this business, and made a mistake. In 2003, the company introduced the Athlon 64 processor, which turned out to be better than the solution from Intel. With this, AMD only spurred Intel to move even faster. While AMD did not have enough financial strength to move on a par. Moreover, Intel at the conference in 2006 presented a strategy with a funny name "tick-tock".

This type of strategy allows you to regularly bring updates to the market with minimal risk. The cycle is designed for 2 years. Each tick is a reduction in the technological process, but the microarchitecture of the processor remains the same. And "so" is a new microarchitecture, but based on the same technical process.

In addition to this strategy, the company has had a "Copy exactly!" Or "Copy exactly" principle since the late 1980s. This method made it possible to produce processors of the same quality at any of the company's factories scattered around the world. At each enterprise, they created the same conditions: the same equipment, reproduced the temperature, pressure, air composition in "clean" zones and even the temperature of the light in the lighting system.

Below is a graph from Intel illustrating the Copy Accurate method. On the chart, each trough is a technological problem. The number of factories is indicated in brackets. Ideally, all graphs should be as synchronous as possible. Any process starts from factory 1 (green line), when stable quality was achieved in the first production. They connect the second one and wait again, and when 1 and 2 are working stably, then the next plant is added, etc. This principle will not avoid mistakes, but will help to quickly eliminate them, as well as ensure that problems do not reoccur when production expands to a new factory.

The "ticking" strategy, coupled with increased production stability, certainly seemed to be a winning one and certainly caused a nervous tick in AMD, as well as allowed to stay ahead and release reliable solutions. However, it seems that it was because of her that the company put on blinders and faced the current problems. It turns out to be a kind of oxymoron when a company that is constantly engaged in innovation has ceased to be innovative. It is also a good illustration of why striving to be at the forefront of progress is not always the best strategy.

Errors

To begin with, Intel has focused too much on its strategy, considering it the only correct one, and its x86 processor is universal and not paying attention to the market situation, which has been slowly but surely changing.

Initially, there were several large companies on the market engaged in the development of processor design and their own production. That all changed, however, when in 1987 TSMC, or Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, announced that it would only manufacture custom-made chips, abandoning its own designs. This statement was of great importance, because the threshold for entering the market dropped at once. Here and there, "non-production" design companies began to appear (in English, the word fabless is used, from fab - an abbreviation for "factory", less - a suffix meaning "without"). Most of the new vendors were developing on ARM architecture, which was easy to license, unlike Intel solutions.

New design companies' processors were used for side tasks. For example, in graphics or specialized computing. Special processors for mining cryptocurrencies are a good illustration of this kind of computing.

And here the first flaw occurred, associated with the constant race of innovations and the desire to control everything. Intel's economy is based on profit from top-end solutions. The company spends huge amounts of money on R&D and constant modification of its factories to the latest standards. This is dangerous as it makes the company unnecessarily vulnerable to market volatility. Chart from Statista shows that in 2017 the market is at its lowest point in the last 10 years, which is directly hitting Intel.

Today there are 4 major processor manufacturers in the world. Descending order: Samsung, Intel, TSMC, GlobalFoundries. The latter venture is a derivative of AMD, which decided to focus only on design and spin off the manufacture into a separate company.

All other enterprises, except Intel, are engaged in contract manufacturing. Samsung also manufactures chips for itself, but most of the power is still used by customers.

And this is how the structure of companies' production looks roughly on the example of TSMC:

Data for Q1 2018

Two conclusions can be drawn at once. First, the naked eye can see that it is time for the company to hire a graphic designer. Secondly, the production of top 10 nm chipsets takes only 19% of the portfolio. 81% of revenue comes from the release of "outdated" solutions.

It turns out that the same TSMC has more free funds, since the constant need to modernize production does not prevail. This also means greater stability, because, for example, Intel, with its focus on innovative solutions, is extremely dependent on the decline in the PC market. In recent years, consumers do not buy solutions for the latest technical processes, preferring less modern hardware, but more profitable in price.

The second mistake is the reluctance to make compromises, which led to the loss of the mobile processor market. Perhaps some have already forgotten, but in 2005 Steve Jobs talked with Intel about the possibility of running an iPhone on Intel's ARM chip (to be in trend, the company once bought one of the ARM manufacturers). However, Intel was so confident that it could deliver an energy-efficient x86-based solution that it eventually thwarted the negotiations. Still, Steve Jobs was one of those people who are difficult to convince if they have already decided something.

The iPhone puncture didn't teach the company anything, so the manufacturer kept trying to install its processor in the mobile phone. As a result, several Intel Atom models entered the market, and the company lost about $ 10 billion in total.

Roughly the same situation happened with GPUs. In 2009, the company tried to present its vision of discrete cards, again based on an x86 processor. Intel Larrabee is a combination of CPU and GPU. The market has convincingly shown that it does not need this.

The third trouble came from where they did not expect. It turned out that the company was unable to keep up with its own pace. In April 2018, in a quarterly call with investors, Intel finally admitted that the company was facing difficulties in mastering the 10nm process technology. This means that the production of processors will continue according to the 14 nm process, presented back in 2014.

For Intel, this situation is all the more offensive since all competitors are already targeting 7 nm. Both AMD (GlobalFoundries) and TMSC were able to deal with manufacturing challenges and start producing 7nm samples. It does not add to the joy that AMD, having taken the lead for the first time noticeably, immediately rushed to pin up Intel. Intel recently decided to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the first x86 processor by giving away 8,086 6-core i7-8086k. AMD reacted with a scathing statement: “We appreciate our competitor's contribution to the x86 architecture over the past 40 years. However, from now on we are ready to continue on our own, so we are ready to exchange the Intel i7-8086k for the first 40 winners for a 16-core Ryzen ™ Threadripper ™ 1950X. "

Along the way, AMD reminded of how Intel disgraced itself at Computex 2018, presenting its 28-core processor with a frequency of 5 GHz. After the presentation, it turned out that this is a completely experimental sample that can only work in tandem with an exotic extreme cooling system.

Well, completing a series of failures of recent days, one cannot fail to mention that Intel really wanted their new Wi-Fi / Bluetooth modem in the iPhone in 2020, on the development of which the company spent $ 115 million in the first quarter of 2018 alone. And according to New Street Research, Intel spent a total of 17 billion on development in 7 years (unconfirmed data). However, leaked internal documents found by the Calcalist tech blog say Apple has changed its mind about partnering with Intel. The details are unfortunately not known.

What's the trouble?

What is the problem? Everybody has black stripes - they have pressed on the market, and fraternizing directors are not uncommon, with whom does it not happen? And if you look from the outside, then Intel looks not only good, but great. The revenue is growing, the turnover is increasing.

And, of course, most companies in the market would dream that their financial statements in difficult times looked like Intel.

If you look under the hood, then the situation does not look so rosy. Take another look at IBM's revenue structures:

Now look at Intel:

85% of the company's revenue and profits come from Client Computing and Data Center, that is, personal computers and servers. If you look at the data in dynamics, then only the first two groups change, the rest of the data is static in terms of profit. The company put all its eggs in one basket and, spitting on diversification, forgot about everything else. Now it turns out that Intel is losing in its key area, and the company does not have a full safety net in the form of other businesses.

Intel is difficult to blame for this situation, as this approach has been profitable for almost 40 years. I wonder what decision management will make: focus on current strengths or windows variant and IBM (trying to expand into new areas). Or maybe AMD will follow the path, allocating production facilities in a separate company and concentrating only on the design of new chipsets. The latter option is, of course, unlikely. Although, in my opinion, this is a good solution, since Intel has some of the best factories in the world.

Of course, the company has a great margin of safety, but the decision about the future should be made now.

The conclusions are quite simple.

There should always be a “B” plan and the company should have multiple sources of profit.
In addition to point number 1. The innovation business is overly dependent on market conditions. You should have stable solutions in your portfolio.
It is important to keep an open mind. If the company didn’t stick out only x86 solutions, but entered into a deal with Apple, then the market today might look different.
If you are the CEO, then you don't have to fraternize with other employees.

This article should be seen as an interesting business case and just a cautionary tale. But also out of curiosity. Are you ready to see AMD as the tech leader of the PC market?

The processor industry is as dynamic as other areas information technologies... The constant improvements of the latest microarchitectures and the release of new ones, although they did not make revolutionary breakthroughs at the beginning of 2016, gave you and me a wider choice within certain classes of central processors.

Once again, we will discuss which of the processors is better - Intel or AMD, and also compare processors for the system for different tasks. I must say right away that the opinion in this article is subjective and can be either supported or refuted by any person and without consequences. This article will not protect one side or the other, everything will be based on the real state of affairs in the world market of central processors.

In addition, let's touch on the mobile solutions segment. Specific answers for systems for certain types of tasks will be given in the conclusions, I advise you to hold out and read to the end.

For convenience and quick transition, the content of the article is given:

AMD vs Intel. A short historical introduction

So let's go. Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices were founded at about the same time: in 1968 and 1969, respectively. That is, both companies have vast experience behind both in the production of processors and in competition with each other. But for some reason Intel is much better known among ordinary "users". And even in some antediluvian technical educational institutions they study in detail the old i8080 processor, which is sore to all techie students. AMD at this time was simply releasing 8080 clones in the form of Am9080 processors. And the first successful AMD proprietary processor is the Am2900.

Okay, let's not talk about sad old processors with frequency at 3 MHz, performed by technical process 6 microns and equipped with an 8-bit data bus. And better, we will slowly move, directly, to the topic of our discussion, and to modern processors with more joyful characteristics.

AMD myths

I would like to dispel the myths about "burning" and "non-overclocking" AMD processors right away. To date, such statements are based on "naked" rumors. About ten years ago there were many cases of failure of Athlon 1400 processors, which simply burned out after the cooler cooling the processor heatsink failed. Yes, then it was relevant, but talking about it when it's 2015 and AMD processors are equipped with excellent thermal protection technology is simply blasphemy.

And the thermal regime depends on various factors, and not only on the processor itself, for example, the factors of influence can be the efficiency of the processor cooler, as well as the quality applying thermal paste... Regarding overclocking, I will not say much and cite specific processor models, but simply state the fact that there are Black Edition processors on sale, which are aimed at overclocking by the manufacturer itself. Likewise, with the new FX from AMD, they not only proved to be suitable for good overclocking, but also boast world records in overclocking.

The negative myths about AMD are over, and now we can remember about Intel. There seem to be no negative myths about Intel. In those days, when Athlones were on fire, one could only hear flattering reviews about the Pentium. This processor was known and revered by many, and even now to the question: "What kind of computer do you have?" Sometimes you can hear a proud answer -"Pentium".

2016 year. Comparison of the main lines of processors from AMD and Intel

I will sharply declare that as of 2016, among AMD and Intel, one can confidently single out the clear leader of the processor hit parade. And based on this article, you can pick up and buy a processor, indeed, taking into account all your needs. If, in the article which video card is better We could not single out a large-scale leader, then everything is a little clearer here. But this leader will be sounded with rather generalized notes, since no one has canceled the specifics of the working and budgetary sphere, but more on that later.

In this subsection of the article, we will go through the main lines of processors from two companies and analyze their work with different types loads, and already in the conclusions, as promised, there will be recommendations for choosing a processor for certain tasks. Accordingly, taking into account specific tasks, the advantage of certain processors will change significantly.

The description and resolution of the dilemma "which is better: amd or intel" should be approached comprehensively and from different viewing angles, because an ordinary consumer needs one thing, and an avid gamer or overclocker needs something completely different. I must say right away that the answer will be dynamic, and I will try to update the article as radically new processor lines from both companies are born, because this year one is leading, and the next is the other.

Let's start a little from afar. When Intel quietly and peacefully continued to release good and high-quality processors, the AMD Athlon 64 line with the modified K8 microarchitecture was born. It was after the appearance of these processors that many started talking about AMD, and many even left Intel at that time. Several years ago there were more or less equal "battles" of Phenom processors on K10 with the corresponding Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad models from Intel. During these periods, a widespread opinion appeared that AMD processors in the middle and budget price range outperform Intel in terms of price / quality ratio. For AMD, everything seemed to be going very, very well, but then the Nehalem microarchitecture appeared, which dealt a significant blow to AMD and revolutionized the processor market.

Core i3 / i5 / i7 on Sandy Bridge began to be actively bought up, raising Intel higher and higher over AMD. A little later, Intel turned the heat into a fire with the release of its second generation Sandy Bridge processors. They turned out to be no less successful than their predecessors: many loved the i5-2400, 2500, i7-2700, and for good reason. Let's not delve into microarchitecture, I will just say that Intel developers have thoroughly improved it, adding many different technologies and features.

A little time passed, and Intel announced the third generation processors - Ivy Bridge. The processors intel core i5-3570K, i7-3770K and many others did not go unnoticed, although they cannot boast of significant improvements. But given the fact that the prices for Ivy and Sandy Bridge are not separated by a chasm, it would be more reasonable to buy a slightly refined Ivy Bridge.

What did AMD do at this time? AMD calmly continues to refine the K10 microarchitecture, gradually adding frequencies to the Phenom. Although AMD Phenom II 9xx processors look very good on the processor market due to their capabilities and prices, they are already morally outdated and it is quite difficult for them to compete with new Intel products.

Then the AMD Llano line of APUs is announced, with a stake on integrated graphics directly on the processor die. The solution is quite interesting, considering that the Llano graphics show good performance, but in computational tests these hybrid chips show the result of dual-core Intel Core i3-2100. Some of the options for saving on a video card will be to their liking, especially since the savings are substantial and Llano processors will be noted by us in the results as an interesting budget option. In addition, a newer line of A-series processors was released - these are Trinity processors, they offer more powerful graphics than Llano, which looks even more delicious for entry-level home systems. Trinity graphics are rightfully considered the best in the world among the integrated on a chip processor.

In the top segment, things did not go very well. Everyone was looking forward to the enchanting departure of the legendary processors on the Bulldozer architecture. Everyone was waiting for a revolution in the processor market, and instead a crude 8-core product was born. In addition, these 8 cores are not quite complete, since the developers combined every two cores in the Bulldozer microarchitecture into 1 module, which can be compared (conditionally) with one core of Ivy Bridge processors. But I would like to emphasize once again that this comparison is very conditional, since from the types of tasks this very convention can be smashed to smithereens both in favor of Intel and AMD.

Then the revision of Bulldozer was announced - Vishera processors with microarchitecturePiledriver - which, according to AMD representatives, gives an increase in the region of 10-15%, while having a lower TDP and all this is supported by a very tempting price.

Of course, it should be noted that both Bulldozer processors and, in particular, their improved version - Vishera– show excellent results under multi-threaded load, this is clearly seen in the 3d max working tests:

Less is better

The FX8350 beats the i7-3770K. Roughly the same situation will be observed in all applications that can create 8 high-quality streams, that is, in most packages for working with graphics, as well as in any other types of complex calculations. If you analyze the results, you can see that the gap from the i7-3770K is insignificant, but given the approximate prices of these models - $ 340 for the i7-3770K and $ 209 for the FX-8350, I think questions about a more profitable processor for these types of tasks should be filmed. Also, the even cheaper FX-8320 will be of interest for these tasks.

But when a single-threaded load falls on the processor, then due to the same unfinished microarchitecture, the bulldozer often loses to opponents from Intel. Those same games typically cannot load more than four cores, which as a result flaunts the disadvantages of Bulldozer cores individually. AMD Vishera processors slightly corrected the situation, but the lag is still noticeable. For clarity, here are some gaming tests:

Of course, the gaming load falls to a greater extent on the video card, but the processor is no less important here. Moreover, games that are quite demanding on processor resources often slip through.

The sample of the given tests is too small, but the general trend of test results both on domestic and foreign sites is exactly the following: from the tests it is clearly seen that the i5-3570K confidently bypasses the opponents from AMD in the face of the new FX-4300, FX-6300 and FX-8350.

Starting in 2015, the Sunnywell company AMD, on which there was practically no hope in terms of innovations, of course, announced the introduction of a new line, referred to as Carrizo. The representatives agreed that Carizzo is the sixth generation, but why the little-known Brazos is not included in the account is not clear. Well, okay, it is worth highlighting the following points of this sensational line presented in Germany.

Carizzo is placed exclusively on one crystal, and before that south bridge and the graphics chip were located on two crystals. The functionality of the device is based on 28 nanometers by the Global Foundries process.
The four cores are of the Excavator architecture. The processor frequency was raised by only 1 MHz, compared to the previous Steamroller, so the processing performance per core, alas, increased slightly, but in general, everything is not so bad - an increase in the region of 15%, while maintaining the previous principles of data processing in general ...
The graphic side has also been updated. In particular, the graphics core received 512 KB of L2 memory. There are significant performance improvements when matched with tessellation, and most importantly, color rendering is lossless.

At the same time, Intel did not skimp on the creation and release of a new generation of processors, which were named Broadwell. And it's worth noting right away that every fan of the Intel team got upset. The processor is a base from Haswell, made on a 14nm process technology. The functionality of the cores and the microarchitecture did not receive any changes, so the desktop Broadwell turned out to be mildly not good.

Of the advantages, one can single out a decrease in heat generation. An integrated graphics core Iris Pro 6200 has also been added. These are, perhaps, all the main important additions to the processor from Intel.

But if we consider in general, for most games, then AMD processors are also doing quite well.

In these tests, the main thing for us is not the FPS specifics of the two games, but the general tendency for FX processors to lag behind in games. In the conclusions, we will note this fact, which will go to AMD's liability.

Laptop CPUs

Intel has reigned in the laptop processor segment for quite a long time, and it reigns very solidly. In both budget and top-end laptops, Core ix processors flaunt, which we touted a little higher.

The release of Llano processors did not change the alignment of forces very much, but brought some variety to the budget segment of laptops. But the Trinity processors can be called a really good attack from AMD. Even more powerful integrated graphics for affordable price, moreover, these processors support Dual Graphics technology. This technology allows the integrated graphics of Trinity processors to work in conjunction with a discrete adapter. As a result, the bundle "Trinty integrated graphics + discrete Radeon HD 7670M" looks very attractive, given the total graphics performance and low cost.

We can safely say that in the budget segment of laptops, AMD Trinity A4 and A6 series are very interesting for the buyer, as they guarantee more powerful graphics than integrated graphics in Intel processors.

In the middle mobile segment, the A10 processors paired with the HD 7670 will also delight with their graphics performance. But already in the fight against certain Core i5s, they will have problems on the computing front. Despite all this, the middle class of notebooks remains subject to tough competition and many will choose the A10 + HD 7670. So in the middle and budget segment, it is not so easy to determine which processor is best for a notebook.

Coming back to the same Carrizo from AMD, which was released in 2015, it is worth noting that the system already has an integrated UVD-6 video decoder. Thanks to this decoder, it became possible to view video in H.264 and H.265 formats. As stated by the Carrizo manufacturers, this is the world's first laptop chip capable of H.265 decoding.

Intel also does not sleep on the issue of graphics for laptops, but significantly lags behind AMD, oddly enough, it sounds. For example, a test was carried out in which Carrizo from AMD and Broadwell from Intel competed, which played 4K video in HEVC format. The results were stunning, when playing video the laptop with AMD-shny Carrizo did not load the processor even by half, while its competitor Inrel was loaded at 80, and sometimes even 100%.

Thus, if back in 2013 Intel was in the lead, then the situation for 2015 has changed somewhat, and now a self-respecting user will prefer a laptop with higher graphics performance running Carrizo processors from AMD.

I would like to note that the purchase of a high-performance laptop is a very controversial thing, I advise you to read the article “ laptop or desktop pc ”, Which will not let you stumble on this deceptive front.

Okay, let's not get hung up on laptop processors, but rather move on to conclusions.

AMD vs Intel - Which Processors Are Better? conclusions

It remains to sum up small results in the battle between AMD and Intel.From the last of the above, everything becomes clear, but let's judge objectively, because everyone has the right to make a mistake, and we will believe that this mistake will be worked out. Let's pay attention to the class of tasks performed by these processors in order to judge fully in the end.

A processor for a budget system with undemanding tasks

To begin with, let's say that better amd or intel in the budget segment of the market. Budget systems are fairly widespread. These can be both home computers and office systems, where the boss tries to buy a fleet of cars for the price of configuring one normal system.
Here, it seems to me, it is worth giving the advantage to AMD. The same new Trinity, like the $ 50-60 A4-5300, will look great in budget home systems, especially when trying to load the system with graphics tasks like gaming. Or at worst, you can complete the system with the cheapest Llano, for $ 40.

For an office park, Trinity machines will also be a good solution, but here they are being squeezed by Pentium G, since in computing tasks they show a higher level of performance due to the second generation Sandy Bridge architecture and a slightly larger volume. cache memory.

AMD-shnaya Carrizo 2015 will be an excellent solution not only for home use, but may well take pride of place among office machines. But AMD's main goal was to release a completely new processor that will satisfy the functionality needs of laptops.

Intel's company with Broadwell, which has become an "unloved child", is losing ground to AMD in many ways. So, in particular, although Broadwell is packed with a powerful graphics core Iris Pro 6200, the functionality at the level of office calculations is poor. Broadwell is not far from Sandy Bridge, which really handled computational tasks up to the mark.

So for an office car park good choice there will be a budget Intel Pentium G processor on Sandy Bridge, released in 2013, or a new work by Carrizo from AMD in 2015.

Gaming CPU

The class of gaming computers is the most comprehensive because it covers as average? and the top segment of processors, there is no place for integrated graphics, and systems are usually equipped with high-performance video cards, which just take over the bulk of the work in games. But a lot also depends on the processor, since no one has canceled the balance in the system.

From the previously analyzed test results, we can confidently say that Intel is needed for an average gaming system. If you are not sorry to overpay a little, and at the same time you want to get some groundwork for the next year or two in most games, then it is Core i5 on Ivy Bridge that in most cases will be the most optimal option than any of the Vishera. By no means do I want to say that Vishera is absolutely not suitable for games. Due to its price, the same FX-6300 will be a very good option for an inexpensive gaming system, although here it is pressed by the Core i3.

But the championship for gaming loads and a home system like "for all tasks" is still behind Core i5, as the mainstream version can be called Core i5-3570 ori5-3470 ... In especially extreme gaming options, the Core i7 will be an even more advanced solution, but at this stage in the development of the gaming industry and in the classic use case, its performance is in most cases excessive.

So for a good gaming system it is recommended Intel core i5 (i7 in some cases), and for a cheaper gaming system, the FX-6300 is a good fit - here you need to look at secondary tasks and, starting from them, give priority to one or another option.

Processor for computationally intensive work

Processing and encoding video / audio, work in complex graphics applicationsas well as any other kind of complex computational work or work in entry-level servers - all this can often be divided into many threads.

As we said earlier, multithreading is the FX-8350's strong point. At its low cost, this processor shows the level of i7-3770K, and sometimes bypasses it in the above types of tasks. Therefore, for workloads, if you do not want to spend extra money, only the FX-8350.

Of course, if you have extra funds, you can overpay and get a universal i7-3770K, both for work and for games, which will also be a reasonable option, but still, according to the well-known price / performance ratio for complex computing tasks FX- 8350 confidently bypasses opponents from Intel.

Also, do not forget about the "hard-solution" from Intel, in the form of the same Core i7-3970X. This processor is the best desktop option: it can do anything and is better than everyone else, but there is only one thing it cannot - be cheap, its cost is about $ 1000. An impeccable extreme option for those who like to throw money.

The processor options given here for different types of tasks are very generalized and cannot accurately reflect each individual case, where minor, but no less important tasks may arise, and the purchase budget may have a significant impact.

If we talk about the financial side of the issue, the AMD-shny Carrizo processor is included in the price range from 350 to 750 US dollars, which is due to the category of application. Accordingly, laptop processors are relatively more expensive than desktop ones, so again you have to choose according to the accumulated budget. But it is worth noting that Carrizo, based on eight graphics and four processor cores, in addition has a technology to optimize work with a 15W power supply. Thanks to this, the new device works 2.4 times faster than the previous generation Kaveri.

The minimum cost of Intel processors in 2015 is $ 380, which does not at all correspond to the parameters that are inherent in Broadwell. In particular, the main role in cost was determined by the graphics core of the latest generation Iris Pro 6200; in a slightly improved microarchitecture, which simply improved the predecessor Haswell, as well as a high rate of heat dissipation. And this, perhaps, is all that Intel can boast about its latest work.

Here is a comparison of processors and the answer to the question: "Which processors are better, Intel or AMD?"

Perhaps there are some controversial points, I will be very happy about your corrections or additions in the comments, but without a holivar and offensive bias.

Finally, we would like to wish AMD to soon pleasantly surprise us with the Streamroller microarchitecture, and also try to give a decent rebuff to Intel, because we do not need a monopoly and inflated prices.

We wish Intel to reduce the prices of its processors and continue to release the same good, powerful and quality products.

And to you, dear friends, I wish you stable operation of the "hearts" of your computers, regardless of who and when they were released. All the best!

Let's see what are the main differences between the processors of the world leaders - Intel and AMD.
We will also consider their positive and negative sides.

Major CPU manufacturers

Everyone is well aware that there are two leading companies in the computing market that are developing and manufacturing the Central Processing Unit (central processing unit), or, more simply, processors.

These devices combine millions of transistors and other logic elements, and are electronic devices of the highest complexity.

The whole world uses computers, the heart of which is an electronic chip either from Intel, or, therefore, it is no secret to anyone that both of these companies are constantly fighting for leadership in this area.

But let's leave these companies alone and move on to the average user who is faced with a dilemma of choice - which is still preferable - Intel or AMD?

Say what you like, but there is no definite answer to this question, and there cannot be, since both manufacturers have huge potential, and their CPUs are capable of meeting the current requirements.

When choosing a processor for his device, the user primarily focuses on its performance and cost - relying on these two criteria as the main ones.

Most of the users have long been divided into two opposing camps, becoming ardent supporters of Intel or AMD products.

Let's take a look at all the strengths and weaknesses of the devices of these leading companies, so that when choosing a particular one, we rely not on speculation, but on specific facts and characteristics.

Pros and cons of Intel processors

So what are the advantages of an Intel processor?

First of all, it is very high performance and performance in applications and games that are most optimized for Intel processors.
Under the control of these processors, the system operates with maximum stability.
It should be noted that the memory of the second and third levels in Intel CPUs operates at higher speeds than in similar processors from AMD.
An important role in performance when working with optimized applications is played by multithreading, which is implemented by Intel in such CPUs as.

Pros and cons of AMD processors

The advantages of AMD processors, first of all, are their affordability in terms of cost, which is remarkably combined with performance.
A huge plus is the multi-platform, which allows you to replace one processor model with another without the need to change motherboard.
That is, a processor designed for socket AM3 can be installed on socket AM2 + without any negative consequences.
It should be noted and multitasking, with which many AMD processors do an excellent job, simultaneously performing work with three applications.
In addition, the FX series processors have quite good overclocking potential, which is sometimes badly needed.

The disadvantages of AMD CPUs include higher power consumption than Intel, as well as work for more low speeds cache memory of the second and third levels.
It should also be noted that most of the processors belonging to the FX line require additional cooling, which will have to be purchased separately.
And one more disadvantage is that fewer games and applications have been adapted and written for AMD processors than for Intel.

Latest connectors from Intel

Today, many of the leading CPU manufacturers are equipped with two current connectors. Intel has the following:

LGA 2011 v3 is a combination connector that is focused on the quick assembly of high-performance personal computer both for servers and for the end user. The key feature of such a platform is the presence of a RAM controller that successfully operates in multi-channel mode. Thanks to this important feature, they are characterized by unprecedented performance with such processors. It must be said that an integrated subsystem is not used within such a platform. Unlocking the potential of such chips is possible only with the help of discrete graphics. For this, only the best video cards should be used;
thanks to LGA, you can easily organize not only a high-performance computing system, but also a budget PC. For example, socket LGA 1151 great for creating a mid-priced computing station, at the same time it will have a powerful integrated graphics core of the Intel Graphics series and support DDR4 memory.

Latest AMD connectors

AMD is promoting the following processor sockets today:

the main computing platform for such a developer is AM3 +... The most productive CPU is considered the lineup FX, which include up to eight compute modules. In addition, such a platform supports an integrated graphics subsystem... However, this is where the graphics core goes into the motherboard rather than being integrated into semiconductor crystals;
most recent current AMD CPU socket - FM3 +... AMD's new CPUs are designed to be used in both entry-level and mid-range desktops and media centers. Thanks to this, the most modern integrated solution will be available to the average user for a fairly small amount.

Work opportunities

Many people pay attention to the price of the processor first. It is also important for them that he can easily solve the tasks assigned to him.

So what can both organizations offer on this point? AMD is not known for its outstanding achievements.

On the other hand, this processor represents an excellent price / performance ratio. If configured correctly, you can expect stable operation without any complaints.

It is worth noting that AMD has managed to implement multitasking. Thanks to such a processor, various applications are easily launched.

With it, you can simultaneously install the game and surf the endless expanses of the Internet.

But Intel is known for more modest results in this area, which confirms the comparison of processors.

It will not be superfluous to pay attention to the possibility of overclocking, during which the performance of the AMD processor can be easily increased by twenty percent compared to the standard settings.

To do this, you just need to use additional software.

Intel beats AMD in almost everything except multitasking. In addition, Intel has always worked with high level.

Power consumption

Energy consumption is one of the important criteria for laptop owners. This is due to the fact that with low power consumption the device will work longer without the need for recharging.

In addition, during such work, there is a slight generation of heat, which also affects the service life of the main components of the PC.

We should also say about performance. After AMD acquired ATI, its creators were able to successfully integrate most of the graphics processing capabilities into the processor cores. These efforts have paid off successfully.

Those who use an AMD chip for games should have no doubt that they get good performance, which is much better than equivalent Intel chips (this is especially true for those who use a card with ATI graphics).

If it comes to a lot of multitasking, then it is better to opt for Intel, since it has HyperTreasing technology.

However, this advantage can only be used when the software application is capable of multitasking, that is, the ability to divide tasks into several small parts.

If the user needs a gaming processor, it is better to combine AMD processor with.

So there is a big difference between intel and amd sockets. When choosing the appropriate option, consider the differences between them listed in this article. This will greatly simplify the selection of the appropriate option.