• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

is Intel just that much beter?

Intel are dominant at the high end. However, that isn't where the money is any more so AMD have gone in different directions.

The last time they competed with (and beat) Intel it nearly sent them broke, because even though the original FX chips were miles better than the crappy P4s people just wouldn't pay a high price for them because they weren't Intels.

Intel is a home recognised brand name. If you asked an elderly relative if they have heard of Intel they would say yes, of course. Ask them about AMD? I doubt it.

Right now the market is mobile. So phones, tablets, phablets, small form factor PCs. And AMD are doing rather well in that sector. They also completely dominate the lower end of the market because aside from one small toy Intel do not offer anything overclockable at the lower end of the market.

AMD are currently putting their eggs into the APU basket and it's paying dividends. Buying ATI was an incredibly intelligent move, Intel should have done it or pushed for Nvidia. The market now is small low powered CPUs with a half decent GPU on for things like consoles, tablets, phones and so on.

If you're not a part of those markets you're in trouble. Intel are, but, their onboard GPU does not even sniff the ones on the AMD APUs. Intel really need to do something about that IMO, especially when the world is gaming crazy (and I mean tablets and phones etc).

I would hazard a guess and bet that I am one of the few on these forums. I have a Blackberry Q10 and use it for the communications side of things, rather than playing games. In fact I have not installed a single game on mine.
 
I never knew 'paying dividends' was a euphemism for declining year-on-year revenue and income. You learn something every day.

AMD have nothing for the profitable high end or the mega volume phone/tablet market. The console market with it's relatively low numbers and razor magin low end craptop CPUs are not going to save things. The problem AMD have, is that Intel absolutely hammer them on battery life and general CPU performance, while their GPU's are 'good enough' for their intended market.
 
layte said:
I never knew 'paying dividends' was a euphemism for declining year-on-year revenue and income. You learn something every day.

AMD have nothing for the profitable high end or the mega volume phone/tablet market. The console market with it's relatively low numbers and razor magin low end craptop CPUs are not going to save things. The problem AMD have, is that Intel absolutely hammer them on battery life and general CPU performance, while their GPU's are 'good enough' for their intended market.
Click to expand...

Maybe their revenue has declined? I've not been up on it and I don't study the stock market but I can absolutely promise you; every one's revenue has been down because we're in a recession.

And as much as the Tories like to lie and pretend otherwise we're still in it ! that's why AMD have not been bothering in the "show off pick your nose and blow off market" because it has declined drastically.

What they are doing is making an APU that allows you to build a full blown working rig for about £200. And they've always been good at that.

Why are they still making FX CPUs if they're that bad? Simple answer - they're still selling !

Intel have closed a factory, AMD have laid a load of people off. The naysayers could quite easily make that sound very bad but the fact is that's what needs to be done now. Even Intel have stopped the showing off and are desperately trying to shrink down their CPUs so that they fit in tablets and so on so they can get a share of that pie.
 
ZXSpectrum said:
Intel Stopped the showing off? Did you see what the i7-5960X Cpus were delivered to reviewers in? :D
Click to expand...

Yeah that was showing off monumentally!

hqdefault.jpg
 
nightrider1470 said:
I do care about price!.... Was hoping an overclocked AMP CPU might beat an expensive Intel 4970k or something
Click to expand...

Not gonna happen, unfortunately. Best case scenario is that you manage to match the performance at a lower cost, but it's only going to happen under specific circumstances.
 
Have currently got a I7 and an AMD APU and am happy with both, depends on what you want your CPU to do.

If i was going for an all rounder it would be the I7, is it notably day to day faster, not really, but then CPUs haven't really moved on from I7 920.
My next upgrade will be an 8 core Intel dosnt seem much point otherwise, if i was in the market for a new set up it would be the 5820K i would base it around i can see that still being competitive in 5 years time.
 
The above is why I still have my I7-2700K, at a 4.7GHz overclock it blasts through almost everything. I do video encode, so extra processors would have been nice, but honestly until something bigger comes along, or at a semi-reasonable cost, then I can't justify it, as there is nothing that will offer me a worthwhile boost, especially not at the cost.

Broadwell doesnt seem to really offer much big either on the high end side, so really I'm awaiting Skylake/Zen in this regards.
 
Sayso said:
If i was going for an all rounder it would be the I7, is it notably day to day faster, not really, but then CPUs haven't really moved on from I7 920.
Click to expand...

They have it's just software that hasn't, back in the day it was all about INT/FPU/MEM bandwidth but nowadays people on here just seem to judge CPU's based upon game performance, which is silly really since most games today are GPU bottlenecked at the resolutions/settings being run.
 
Alexrose1uk said:
The above is why I still have my I7-2700K, at a 4.7GHz overclock it blasts through almost everything. I do video encode, so extra processors would have been nice, but honestly until something bigger comes along, or at a semi-reasonable cost, then I can't justify it, as there is nothing that will offer me a worthwhile boost, especially not at the cost.

Broadwell doesnt seem to really offer much big either on the high end side, so really I'm awaiting Skylake/Zen in this regards.
Click to expand...

We don't really know what the unlocked broadwell's will be like - there are no benchmarks or tests done yet, that I've seen at least. If you can link any, I'm all ears.

All I've seen is some mobile broadwell core-M stuff, which didn't seem amazing but might have no reflection on the unlocked, higher power ones.

I'm quite curious how they intend to beat the 4790k - will they clock the broadwell part higher, or will IPC increase of 3-8% be enough to lower the clocks, we'll see!
 
Dave2150 said:
We don't really know what the unlocked broadwell's will be like - there are no benchmarks or tests done yet, that I've seen at least. If you can link any, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

There is this, which gives us some idea of what the architecture is like, and then there was a comment I saw from an Intel bod, which basically advised that Skylake will be where the big performance increases come in, it is not that far timescale wise behind Broadwell tbh, as Broadwell is essentially late.

I believe dev boards with Skylake are already out there.

Example:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2683392/pc-confusion-to-linger-on-intels-quick-jump-to-skylake.html
http://techreport.com/news/27028/intel-demos-skylake-silicon-production-expected-in-2h-2015
 
Last edited:
Just adding my 2 pennies worth.

I use to be AMD only. Not sure why, family computer was and couldn't afford Intel. Got a better job and went for a 3570K. I noticed the difference straight away. Windows booted quicker, general use was quicker, higher fps in games.definitely worth the cost and good move.
 
Always used AMD since the XP days, but for the last few years mainly used i5's.
I doubt i will ever use or recommend an AMD system unless they bring out something worth using.
 
As someone who has actually owned the best AMD could offer (8350@5,1ghz stable) and currently using a haswell i7 ([email protected], pi**poor clocker) i would say that a 8350@5 ghz is performing roughly the same as a 4770k at stock with its default boost speed(3.9ghz) with better minimums on the Intel side. There will be cases where the fps on the AMD tanks hard even though it in theory shouldnt but you can thank the specific game devs for that.
 
I have an i7 4770k and an 8350 both at stock speeds, 16gb ram, SSD and using them daily for similar tasks I have to say that other than the volume of the PC (Intel silent, AMD very much not) they are functionally identical.

IMO we are getting to the point where CPU performance just isnt the limiting factor anymore for the vast majority of users.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom