Intel or AMD

[legendarytoyou]

I'll be honest I get conflicting reports of which spec is optimal for a gaming PC.  I've been a tried and true AMD user and upon receiving a Ryzen MOBO I went on the mad hunt for a new 16 core Threadripper.  Upon talking to a number of people however I get conflicting reports that the Ryzen cores cause a number of issues.

 

I would like the communities personal opinion.  I recently sent for a used i7 Intel CPU.  Converting would be simple however the details need more emphasis.

[Vader666]

I just noticed there is no popcorn related smiley available here...

[Guest]

For old games you will rarely have benefits from many cores. Some very old games are not-multithreaded at all.

On recent games you can benefit from many cores. But not from all games.

 

From what I can see the Threadripper architecture is really the best in having multi-threaded apps working. And is quite good for single-threaded apps.

Intels are often better in single thread apps. But only if you go fir the high scale chips (i7 and i9.)

[legendarytoyou]

7 minutes ago, CPU said:

For old games you will rarely have benefits from many cores. Some very old games are not-multithreaded at all.

On recent games you can benefit from many cores. But not from all games.

 

From what I can see the Threadripper architecture is really the best in having multi-threaded apps working. And is quite good for single-threaded apps.

Intels are often better in single thread apps. But only if you go fir the high scale chips (i7 and i9.)

Well I sent for a new i7 (i9 is still a small fortune so that's out).  I'm also gunning for a MOBO that uses DDR4 2400.  Currently using DDR3 2133 so I'm looking for an upgrade mostly that and I've never actually used an Intel chipset.  Another question I have is that is true Nvidia GPU's usually run better with Intel MOBO's or is that just an urban myth?

[Guest]

AMD is releasing some pretty damn impressive Video cards ( Navi )  without the bugs that NVIDIA cards have, 5 drivers in 3 months WTF,some of their CPU's are overpriced ( down under they retail at 400$ plus AUD) putting them out of upgrading I'd love nothing better to say stick it Intel,heat has always been a problem since the 90's, unsure if it's still a problem.dye size is currently the main problem and let's not forget DX12 is based on Vulcan.....but M$ is a a prick and governs the market

 

My rig I5 6600k Z170 Mb DDR4 2600  Mhz GTX 1070,upgrade price 2000$ for a 20% increase....like I'd actually see that,the ThreadRipper is in my opinion a better CPU but current pricing puts it out of contention

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, legendarytoyou said:

Well I sent for a new i7 (i9 is still a small fortune so that's out).  I'm also gunning for a MOBO that uses DDR4 2400.  Currently using DDR3 2133 so I'm looking for an upgrade mostly that and I've never actually used an Intel chipset.  Another question I have is that is true Nvidia GPU's usually run better with Intel MOBO's or is that just an urban myth?

It is a myth.

The card passes through the PCIe bridge, so it is CPU agnostic.

[Guest]

This video sums things up better than I could and with more proof

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEszLdXMMu4&t=621s

[legendarytoyou]

Cool thx guys.  I'll be upgrading to the Intel Chipset and use the AMD as a backup in case the new one barfs on itself.  Thank you all so much.?

[27X]

The main problem with AMD is latency. Off die memory controllers introduce lag full stop. At 1080/60/8bit you're probably very very unlikely to notice.

 

At 4K/8K/144/10-12 you're definitely going to feel the difference. Lack of latency is actually intel's only clear and distinct advantage as of ryzen, especially with amd's strides in bandwidth and threading.

 

On 4/1/2019 at 7:18 AM, sikkboy said:

AMD is releasing some pretty damn impressive Video cards ( Navi )  without the bugs that NVIDIA cards have, 5 drivers in 3 months WTF,some of their CPU's are overpriced ( down under they retail at 400$ plus AUD) putting them out of upgrading I'd love nothing better to say stick it Intel,heat has always been a problem since the 90's, unsure if it's still a problem.dye size is currently the main problem and let's not forget DX12 is based on Vulcan.....but M$ is a a prick and governs the market

 

My rig I5 6600k Z170 Mb DDR4 2600  Mhz GTX 1070,upgrade price 2000$ for a 20% increase....like I'd actually see that,the ThreadRipper is in my opinion a better CPU but current pricing puts it out of contention

100% opinion, 0% fact or physics.

 

Su has said outright that Navi is a midrange refresh squarely targeted at consumers willing to buy up at no more than 500-700 bucks, and performance is expected to be about 2070 levels at BEST output. There a reason Sony paid in for this model and had a direct hand in the specs. nvidia still and will own the high end for the foreseeable future, and they haven't bothered to trot out 7nm samples to anyone other than engineers and devs. AMD already has both Sony and M$ wrapped up, they have very little reason to fuck around with nvidia on a market lane where nvidia has a literal year and half head start. Any flagship class Navi will have to wait for perfect yields and for console ship sellouts to be a thing of the past because at least entire three fab yields belong to consoles.

[Tyrant99]

Ryzen 2700X here.

 

My personal experience with it has been quite good.

 

It benchmarks fairly close to an i7-8700 / i7-8700K 

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3940vs3958

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-8700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-2700X/3937vs3958

 

The Intel is a bit faster with single and quad core and the Ryzen is faster with multi-core. So for a pure gaming PC, the Intel probably has an edge, though the Ryzen is certainly capable. 

 

If you're like me and doing any development stuff, the 2700X holds up nicely and will mostly beat out the i7s for rendering jobs etc. and at a better price. Not as good as the i9s, but a lot cheaper.

 

https://techgage.com/article/a-performance-review-amds-ryzen-5-2600x-ryzen-7-2700x-processors/3/

 

[Pork Type]

On 4/1/2019 at 9:04 AM, legendarytoyou said:

Well I sent for a new i7

As long as you're aware that the new i7 (the i7-9700K) is a single threaded, 8 core unit, not a multi threaded unit. Intel pulled a bit of branding shennanigans, there. If you're after virtual cores without breaking the bank, get the i7-8700K. The only multi threaded 9K series chip is the i9.

 

I've been using AMD/ATi GPUs for donkey's years. They work. They're usually great bang for the buck. Their heatsink bolthole patterns are consistent across generations, so my universal GPU waterblocks pretty much always fit whenever it's upgrade time. That's been the case now for 13 years.

[joemonco]

So is the fact that without watercooling they sound like a C-130 flying overhead but will allow you to turn your thermostat down because of their space-heating capabilities.  Oh, and the bugs that allow stat exploits in Dragon Age: Origins.

 

Intel have their own problems.

[Miss AshleyJ]

I have a now 5 year old Alienware X51 R2 that was given to me as a Christmas gift.

 

I3 3.5ghz dual core 

 

I’ve upgraded the RAM to max (16GB) and squeezed in an HP 120GB SSD, set to max page file to make up for the memory hardware limitations.

 

does the job alright. No real complaints yet even after all this time.

 

 

[2dk2c.2]

1 hour ago, KamenRiderzero1 said:

I have a now 5 year old Alienware X51 R2 that was given to me as a Christmas gift.

 

I3 3.5ghz dual core 

 

I’ve upgraded the RAM to max (16GB) and squeezed in an HP 120GB SSD, set to max page file to make up for the memory hardware limitations.

 

does the job alright. No real complaints yet even after all this time.

 

 

I been told a guy needs  a swapfile regardless, it's like clothes or something, but "memory hardware limitations" has me wondering.

And you'll see, I have 16gb also. Is it a problem?

My m.2 comes Friday or so, finally something I can hold my head up about and not stare at the ground in shame.

(If it actually works)

I wrote a blog about PC's some of which have 128gb of memory.

The complete $6500 system only has a 2070 (o the shame) but the rest is forum-worthy.

[Reginald_001]

For drivers and support Intel is the way to go, all the way. After having tried AMD 3 times with different cards, I went back to Intel and never looked back.

 

18 minutes ago, 2dk2c.2 said:

I been told a guy needs  a swapfile regardless, it's like clothes or something, but "memory hardware limitations" has me wondering.

And you'll see, I have 16gb also. Is it a problem?

My m.2 comes Friday or so, finally something I can hold my head up about and not stare at the ground in shame.

(If it actually works)

I wrote a blog about PC's some of which have 128gb of memory.

The complete $6500 system only has a 2070 (o the shame) but the rest is forum-worthy.

 

You need a swap file if you want to have a stack trace after a BSOD. And even though 16GB's can seem like a lot, if something has a memory leak (*cough* firefox *cough* chrome *couch* most browsers) then when your memory does run full, your machine will have a hard (HARD) crash where you can corrupt your disks and OS.

 

So therefore you always need a swap file, there is no discussion.

[Miss AshleyJ]

20 minutes ago, 2dk2c.2 said:

I been told a guy needs  a swapfile regardless, it's like clothes or something, but "memory hardware limitations" has me wondering.

And you'll see, I have 16gb also. Is it a problem?

My m.2 comes Friday or so, finally something I can hold my head up about and not stare at the ground in shame.

(If it actually works)

I wrote a blog about PC's some of which have 128gb of memory.

The complete $6500 system only has a 2070 (o the shame) but the rest is forum-worthy.

 

well, the board/CPU set up for my machine is limited to a 16GB address bus, so that's a hard cap for me.

 

I play a lot of "Cities:Skylines" (wrote a blog post about it) and it's a memory hog, between DLC and CC from Steam, it needs almost the entire thing, Take twenty minutes to load (but once it gets going it runs fine)

[joemonco]

2 minutes ago, Reginald_001 said:

You need a swap file if you want to have a stack trace after a BSOD. And even though 16GB's can seem like a lot, if something has a memory leak (*cough* firefox *cough* chrome *couch* most browsers) then when your memory does run full, your machine will have a hard (HARD) crash where you can corrupt your disks and OS.

 

So therefore you always need a swap file, there is no discussion.

 

The fuck you doin' that your browser uses that much RAM?

[Reginald_001]

10 minutes ago, joemonco said:

 

The fuck you doin' that your browser uses that much RAM?

That's a question that doesn't help anything nor point to the underlying problem of misbehaving websites, banners, plugins and other nonsense.

Also, it's a question directed to me personally, while you can clearly read that I was speaking in general.

 

So in short, no, not like that. Try again.

 

(Sorry for sounding a bit bitchy, don't mean to but I've been working 16 hour workdays for three weeks in a row and sometimes have difficulty remaining a normal human being).

[Miss AshleyJ]

1 hour ago, Reginald_001 said:

(Sorry for sounding a bit bitchy, don't mean to but I've been working 16 hour workdays for three weeks in a row and sometimes have difficulty remaining a normal human being).

Isn't it an amazing feeling when you can get through days like that and avoid the impulse to throttle someone (used to work at a Staples. Back to School was three weeks of hell and I have a short fuse.)

[joemonco]

1 hour ago, Reginald_001 said:

That's a question that doesn't help anything nor point to the underlying problem of misbehaving websites, banners, plugins and other nonsense.

Also, it's a question directed to me personally, while you can clearly read that I was speaking in general.

 

And you can clearly give the benefit of the doubt to an individual asking an obviously flippant and general question on a non-professional web forum.  ?

 

[legendarytoyou]

On 4/3/2019 at 2:16 AM, Pork Type said:

As long as you're aware that the new i7 (the i7-9700K) is a single threaded, 8 core unit, not a multi threaded unit. Intel pulled a bit of branding shennanigans, there. If you're after virtual cores without breaking the bank, get the i7-8700K. The only multi threaded 9K series chip is the i9.

 

I've been using AMD/ATi GPUs for donkey's years. They work. They're usually great bang for the buck. Their heatsink bolthole patterns are consistent across generations, so my universal GPU waterblocks pretty much always fit whenever it's upgrade time. That's been the case now for 13 years.

Hmm...I sent for a Intel Core i7-920 Bloomfield Quad-Core 2.66 GHz LGA 1366 130W BX80601920 Processor I'm afraid.  Good or bad?  It;'s a Quad core.  I know AMD products up until the new Ryzen cores (sporting and FX-8350 Black myself) so this is uncharted territory.

[Pork Type]

2 hours ago, legendarytoyou said:

Hmm...I sent for a Intel Core i7-920 Bloomfield Quad-Core 2.66 GHz LGA 1366 130W BX80601920 Processor I'm afraid.  Good or bad?  It;'s a Quad core.  I know AMD products up until the new Ryzen cores (sporting and FX-8350 Black myself) so this is uncharted territory.

The marketing blurb mentions Multithreading only at the very bottom. And not Hyperthreading. Know the difference.

 

Intel has changed its CPU nomenclature, such that, the i7 branding no longer implies Hyperthreading.

 

Quoting directly from Amazon:

 

Quote

Product Description

Crush your enemies, climb the tower of paperwork, or do both at the same time. Intel's Core i7 processor not only makes it possible, it makes it easy. The Core i7 920 has quad cores that run at 2.66GHz and shares 8MB of L3 cache.Quad cores means true multi-tasking and multi-threading. One core handles the usual action on your operating system, while the second can play a DVD on the TV, the third download a file from internet, and the fourth one sends audio to the kids in another room without lags or stutters. All this is made easier with Intel’s advanced Digital Media Boost.

From the Manufacturer

The Intel Core i7-920 processor combines the power of four 3.06 GHz computing cores into a single processor, guaranteeing enough processing power for the most demanding applications. With 8 MB of smart cache, the Core i7-920 processor ensures that you get maximum responsiveness from your system, even when several intensive programs run simultaneously. Compatible with motherboards based on the Intel X58 Express chipset, the Core i7-920 processor takes your computing and gaming experience to the next level.

This is a Multhithreading blurb. Not a Hyperthreading one. This is a 4 core/4 thread budget CPU. It's probably better than an i5-2500k, but not by much.

[JimPhrasenlaus]

First: This is 100% true opinion, no hard facts in mind.

 

So, from my experience: for gaming it's not as important, what kind of CPU/GPU/APU you use, but driver communication seems to better with the pairings intel/nvidia - amd/ati. From hardware sight, they doing all just fine, but AMD and ATI have a feature, that CPU and GPU can communicate directly (driver based), so there might be quite a tiny bit more performance (can be ignored either, it's really not much, but could possibly prevent bugs in drivers [from my machine {ryzen 1700x ATI-whatever} works fine, no problems])

My old machine (intel i5 Nvidia-whatever) have had some bugs, especially the graphics (seemed to be a problem with drivers vs. windows; drivers vs. Ubuntu/Arch Linux/Mint worked fine). Some games need specific software (like nvidia physiX) and that, for sure, could run better with nvidia, but ATI has no problem at all to run this software.

As a musician i prefer AMD, because, with Linux installed, you definitly can drop performance to a minimum and you're not in need for a specific sound-card, mainboard does what you need, for more complex sound-engineering: get a sound-interface and your fine (that counts for win too, mac does not (hard-)need a soundinterface).

Hard opinion: Providers of Benchmarks only show you, what they really WANT to show you. Personally, i don't see objectivity there, but i did not get to deep into it. Maybe have to look into it much deeper.

 

To sum up my opinion:

I would prefer AMD, because the prize is very acceptable, intel is quite overprized for performance comparable with AMD. Let us look to the future, what technology in architecture is the best...

[Guest]

I had both CPUs. But, after last i3 CPU, I bought AMD and will never go back to Intel.

[Encon4]

AMD is the best, It gives performance for a great price compared to Intel.

I have FX 6350 and still kicking in 2019 games although I have to lower the graphics, but what matters to me is the gameplay.