Which processor is better: AMD or Intel. How to make the right choice? Which processor is better, Intel or AMD?

26.12.2023

Adviсe

The processor industry is no less dynamic than other areas of information technology. Constant improvements to the latest microarchitectures and the release of new ones, although they did not make revolutionary breakthroughs at the beginning of 2016, did give us a wider choice within certain classes of central processors.

Once again we will discuss which processor is better - Intel or AMD, and also compare processors for the system for different tasks. I’ll say right away that the opinion in this article is subjective and can be either supported or refuted by anyone and without consequences. This article will not defend one side or another; everything will be based on the real state of affairs of the global central processor market.

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

For convenience and quick transition, the contents of the article are given:

AMD vs Intel. A short historical introduction

So, let's go. Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices were founded around the same time: in 1968 and 1969, respectively. That is, both companies have vast experience both in the production of processors and in competition with each other. But for some reason, Intel is much more famous among ordinary “users”. And even in some antediluvian technical schools they study in detail the old i8080 processor, which is sore for all technical students. AMD at this time simply released clones of the 8080 in the form of Am9080 processors. And the first successful AMD processor of its own design can be called the Am2900 processor.

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

Myths about AMD

I would immediately like to dispel the myths about “burning” and “not subject to” overclocking AMD processors. To date, such statements are based on “naked” rumors. About ten years ago there were many precedents for the failure of processors like the Athlon 1400, which simply burned out after the cooler cooling the processor radiator failed. Yes, it was relevant then, 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 just on the processor itself, for example, the efficiency of the processor cooler, as well as the quality applying thermal paste. Regarding overclocking, I won’t say much and cite specific processor models, but will simply state the fact that there are processors from the “Black Edition” series on sale, which are oriented towards overclocking by the manufacturer itself. It’s the same with the new FX from AMD, they have not only proven themselves to be suitable for good overclocking, but also boast world records in overclocking.

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

2016 Comparison of the main processor lines from AMD and Intel

Let me sharply declare that as of 2016, among AMD and Intel we can confidently identify the clear leader in the processor hit parade. And based on this article, you can choose and buy a processor, truly taking into account all your needs. If, in the article which video card is better Since we were unable to identify a large-scale leader, here everything is a little clearer. But this leader will be voiced with rather general notes, since no one has canceled the specifics of the work and budget spheres, but more on that later.

In this subsection of the article, we will go through the main lines of processors from the two companies and analyze their performance under various types of loads, and in the conclusions, as promised, recommendations will be given 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, but an avid gamer or overclocker needs something completely different. I’ll say right away that the answer will be dynamic, and I will try to update the article as radically new lines of processors from both companies are born, because this year one is leading, and next year the other.

Let's start a little from afar. When Intel quietly and peacefully continued to produce good and high-quality processors, the AMD Athlon 64 line with a modified K8 microarchitecture was born. It was after the appearance of these processors that many started talking about AMD, and many even moved away from Intel at that time. Several years ago there were more or less equal battles between Phenom K10 processors and the corresponding Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad models from Intel. During these periods, a widespread opinion emerged that AMD processors in the mid-range and budget price range were superior to 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 actively sell out, raising Intel higher and higher above AMD. A little later, Intel added heat to the fire by releasing second-generation Sandy Bridge processors. They turned out to be no less successful than their predecessors: many people loved the i5-2400, 2500, i7-2700, and for good reason. Let's not delve into microarchitecture, I’ll just say that Intel developers have thoroughly refined it, adding many different technologies and features.

A little time passed, and Intel announced third generation processors - Ivy Bridge. The intel core i5-3570K, i7-3770K and many others processors 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 an abyss, it would be more reasonable to buy a slightly polished Ivy Bridge.

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

Then the AMD Llano line of hybrid processors is announced, with a focus on integrated graphics directly on the processor chip. The solution is quite interesting, considering that Llano graphics show good performance, but in computing tests these hybrid chips show the result of dual-core Intel Core i3-2100. Some people will like the option of saving on a video card, especially since the savings are significant 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 those integrated on a processor chip.

Things didn't go well in the top segment. Everyone was looking forward to the enchanting launch of the legendary processors based on the Bulldozer architecture. Everyone was expecting a revolution in the processor market, but instead a crude 8-core product was born. In addition, these 8 cores are not entirely 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’ll emphasize once again that this comparison is very conditional, since depending on the type of tasks, this very convention can be broken to smithereens both in favor of Intel and AMD.

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

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

Less is better

FX8350 beats i7-3770K. Approximately the same situation will be observed in all applications that can create 8 high-quality threads, that is, in most graphics packages, as well as in any other types of complex calculations. If we analyze the results, we 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 specifically for these types of tasks should be removed. Also, the even cheaper FX-8320 will be interesting for these tasks.

But when a single-threaded load falls on the processor, due to the same unfinished microarchitecture, the bulldozer often loses to opponents from Intel. Those same games typically fail to load more than four cores, which ends up exposing the shortcomings of the Bulldozer cores individually. AMD Vishera processors have corrected the situation a little, but the lag is still noticeable. For clarity, here are some game tests:

Of course, the gaming load falls largely on the video card, but the processor is an equally important link here. Moreover, games that are quite demanding on processor resources often slip through.

The sample of tests presented is too small, but the general trend of testing results on both domestic and foreign sites is exactly this: from the tests it is clearly visible that the i5-3570K confidently outperforms opponents from AMD in the form of the new FX-4300, FX-6300 and FX-8350.

Already in 2015, the Sunnywell company AMD, which had practically no hopes for innovation, announced, of course, the introduction of a new line called Carrizo. The representatives stipulated that the Carizzo is the sixth generation, but it is not clear why the little-known Brazos is not included in the accounting. Well, okay, it’s worth highlighting the following points of this sensational line presented in Germany.

Carizzo is located exclusively on one chip, and before that the southbridge and the graphics chip were located on two crystals. The functionality of the device is based on 28 nanometers using the Global Foundries process.
Four cores have Excavator architecture. The processor frequency was raised only by 1 MHz compared to the previous Steamroller, so the data processing performance per core, alas, increased slightly, but overall everything is not so bad - an increase of about 15%, while generally maintaining the previous principles of data processing .
The graphic side has also been updated. In particular, the graphics core received 512 KB of second-level memory. Significant performance improvements are seen when matching tessellation, and very importantly, color reproduction is lossless.

At the same time, Intel did not skimp on the creation and release of a new generation of processors, which were called Broadwell. And it’s worth noting right away that every fan of the Intel team was disappointed. The processor is based on Haswell, made using a 14-nm process technology. The core functionality and microarchitecture did not receive any changes, so the desktop Broadwell turned out to be, to put it mildly, not great.

One of the advantages is a reduction in heat generation. An integrated graphics core Iris Pro 6200 has also been added. These are, perhaps, all the main important additions to the operation of the processor from Intel.

But if we look at it in general, for most games, AMD processors also perform quite well.

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

Laptop CPUs

Intel has reigned supreme in the laptop processor segment for quite some time now, and it reigns very thoroughly. Both budget and top-end laptops feature Core ix processors, which we praised a little higher.

The release of Llano processors did not change the balance of power very much, but it did introduce some variety into the budget laptop segment. But the Trinity processors can be called a truly good attack from AMD. Even more powerful integrated graphics at an affordable price, and 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 combination of “integrated Trinty graphics + discrete Radeon HD 7670M” looks very attractive, taking into account the total graphics performance and low cost.

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

In the mid-range mobile segment, A10 processors paired with 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. With all this, the middle class of laptops remains subject to fierce competition and many will choose the A10 + HD 7670. So in the middle and budget segment, determining which processor is better for a laptop is not so easy.

Returning 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 watch video in H.264 and H.265 formats. As stated by the Carrizo manufacturers, this is the world's first chip for laptops that can decode H.265.

Intel is also not asleep when it comes to laptop graphics, but it lags significantly behind AMD, as strange as it may sound. Thus, testing was carried out in which Carrizo from AMD and Broadwell from Intel competed, playing 4-K video in HEVC format. The results were stunning: when playing video, a laptop with AMD Carrizo did not load the processor even halfway, 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 in 2015 has changed somewhat, and now a self-respecting user will prefer a laptop with greater graphics performance running Carrizo processors from AMD.

I would like to note that purchasing a high-performance laptop is a very controversial thing, I advise you to read the article “ laptop or desktop PC”, which will not allow you to stumble on this deceptive front.

Okay, let's not dwell on processors for laptops, but rather move on to the conclusions.

AMD and Intel. Which processors are better? conclusions

It remains to sum up the battle between AMD and Intel.From what was said 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 corrected. Let's pay attention to the class of tasks performed by these processors in order to ultimately judge fully.

Processor for a budget system with undemanding tasks

First, let’s answer what is better than amd or intel in the budget segment of the market. Budget systems are quite widespread. These can be both home computers and office systems, where the boss is trying to buy a fleet of machines for the price of the configuration of one normal system.
Here, it seems to me, we should give the advantage to AMD. The same new Trinity, such as the A4-5300 for $50-60, will look great in budget home systems, especially when trying to load the system with graphical tasks such as games. Well, or at worst, you can equip the system with the cheapest Llano, for $40.

For an office fleet of machines, Trinity 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 slightly larger volume cache memory.

The 2015 AMD Carrizo 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 would satisfy the functionality needs of laptops.

The Intel company, with Broadwell, which has become the “unloved child,” is largely losing ground to AMD’s competitors. So, in particular, although Broadwell is equipped with a powerful Iris Pro 6200 graphics core, the functionality at the level of office calculations leaves much to be desired. Broadwell is not far removed from Sandy Bridge, which really handled computing tasks at the proper level.

So for an office fleet of machines, a good choice would be the budget Intel Pentium G processor on Sandy Bridge, released in 2013, or the new 2015 Carrizo from AMD.

Processor for gaming computer

The class of gaming computers is the most comprehensive, because it covers as average? So is the top segment of processors, there is no place for integrated graphics, and systems are usually equipped with high-performance video cards, which do 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 the average gaming system requires Intel. If you don’t mind overpaying a little, and at the same time you want to get a certain reserve for the next year or two in most games, then the Core i5 on Ivy Bridge in most cases will be the best option than any of the Vishera. In no way do I want to say that Vishera is absolutely unsuitable 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 being squeezed by the Core i3.

But the primacy for gaming loads and a home system like “for all tasks” is still with the Core i5, as the mainstream option can be called the Core i5-3570 or i5-3470 . In particularly extreme gaming scenarios, a Core i7 would be an even more advanced solution, but at this stage of development of the gaming industry and the classic use case, its performance is in most cases excessive.

So, for a good gaming system, an Intel core i5 (in some cases i7) is recommended, and for a cheaper gaming system, the FX-6300 is a good choice - here you need to look at secondary tasks and, based on them, give preference to one or another option.

Processor for demanding computing work

Video/audio processing and encoding, work in complex graphics applications, as well as any other type of complex computing work or work on entry-level servers - all this can often be divided into multiple threads.

As we said earlier, multi-threading is the FX-8350's strong point. At its low cost, this processor shows the level of the i7-3770K, and sometimes even surpasses it in the above types of tasks. Therefore, for workloads, if you don’t want to spend extra money, use 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 at the well-known price/performance ratio for complex computing tasks FX- The 8350 confidently outperforms its 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 everything better than anyone else, but there’s only one thing it can’t do – 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 general and cannot accurately reflect each individual case, where secondary, but no less important tasks may arise, and the purchase budget may also have a significant impact.

If we talk about the financial side of the issue, then the AMD Carrizo processor is included in the price range from 350 to 750 US dollars, which is determined by the category of application. Accordingly, laptop processors are comparatively more expensive than desktop processors, so again you have to choose according to your accumulated budget. But it’s just worth noting that Carrizo, based on eight graphics and four processor cores, additionally has technology to optimize operation with 15 W power. 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 inherent in Broadwell. In particular, the main role in cost was determined by the graphics core of the latest generation Iris Pro 6200; a slightly improved microarchitecture, which simply improved its Haswell predecessor, as well as a high heat reduction rate. And this, perhaps, is all that Intel can boast about its latest work.

This is how the comparison of processors turned out and the answer to the question: “Which processors are better, Intel or AMD?”

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

Finally, we unanimously wish AMD to pleasantly surprise us with the Streamroller microarchitecture soon, and also try to give a worthy rebuff to Intel, because we don’t need a monopoly and inflated prices.

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

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

Both AMD and Intel are suitable for modern games; these brands have lines of powerful processors with almost identical characteristics in the same price segments.

The classic debate about which processor to choose between Intel and AMD becomes even more lively when it comes to the gaming configuration of the computer system. These two companies are giants of the computer industry in their own way, so it is quite difficult to identify a leader among them.

Having spent quite impressive sums on the purchase of a powerful processor for a gaming PC, the user has the right to demand an appropriate return from it. In the end, how smoothly games will launch and run will largely depend on the processor. The debate about which solution is better can be boiled down to two main points:

analogues have similar characteristics, but at the same time may differ in price;
how much higher a person is willing to pay for higher performance.

AMD or Intel for games? Which processor is best for a gaming computer?

CPU clock speed

Most modern processors from Intel, including the Intel Core i7, have a clock frequency of 2.70 to 3.60 GHz. Likewise, most AMD processors have a frequency of about 4.5 GHz. As you can see, the speed in the top lines of processors from both manufacturers is very high, which can cover the shortcomings of each processor performance architecture; this all boils down to the fact that the clock frequency no longer affects the same as, for example, a few years ago.

Processor cost

Of course, AMD unconditionally wins in this regard; its models are cheaper and more accessible than those of its competitor. AMD FX processors start at $100 and are well suited for gaming.

Currently, you can choose the AMD FX-6300 or FX-6350, which costs about $120, which is about 15% cheaper than the Intel i3, meaning it can be used to build a budget gaming computer. Once the $150 budget is exceeded, Intel's solutions usually become more attractive due to their higher performance, but there is always an exception to the rule. In fact, similar gaming performance between AMD and Intel comes with similar prices, which rarely fluctuate.

The difference in price often convinces the average person that the more expensive the better. But not everything is so simple; some users notice that performance should be sufficient, not excessive. And we must admit that for most tasks, the performance of mid-segment processors will be quite sufficient. So is it worth paying a large amount, sometimes twice as much, for power that will be unclaimed? In this regard, it is a matter of perspective and financial security of the buyer.

Some users choose a more budget option because its performance will be enough for gaming, while others prefer to shell out for a more famous and powerful product. Typically, AMD is the leader in the mid-price segment, but this is also not the rule.

Integrated (built-in) video adapter

The video card is of great importance in the gaming configuration of the computer, directly affecting the quality of graphics. Of course, an integrated video adapter does not have its due importance in modern high-performance games, but for budget-saving and casual games it will be the best option.

It is worth noting that 75% of overall gaming performance depends on the graphics card. Although both processors use excellent, integrated high-quality video adapters, to obtain the highest realism, you should take care of purchasing a video card separately.

Overclocking potential

Processors, as a rule, have a fixed frequency and overclocking potential. However, gamers prefer processors with the ability to increase clock speeds, allowing them to get better performance and impact in games. This feature is called “overlocking” or, more simply, processor overclocking. The basic principle is the ability to increase the clock frequency above the base.

If you are a fan of using the overclocking potential of the processor, then AMD is the preferable option as it may seem at first glance, since they are in the modern FX line, usually have an unlocked multiplier, a larger number of cores, albeit at a slightly lower operating speed.

Intel processors, as a rule, have a locked clock frequency and, therefore, are not suitable for fans of fine-tuning processor tuning, but everything can be decided by purchasing a processor with an unlocked multiplier, while the cost, as well as the processor frequency, will also increase, not to mention the purchase of additional cooling and dedicated specifically for overclocking the motherboard, which in principle may also be characteristic of AMD.

Other factors to consider when choosing a processor

When deciding whether to choose AMD or Intel for games when comparing these processors, it is important that they are compared on similar platforms and in the same price segment. The size of RAM, motherboard characteristics and all other parameters must be identical. Only these subtleties can identify a specific leader, even in a synthetic test.
Various tests will show that, on average, both processors are equally good, although Intel performs some tasks a little faster, but the price is most likely a little higher. But the main conclusion should be that the gamer should get the optimal price-to-feature ratio. PC gamers understand that small differences are really minor and may not make up for a big difference in price.

In addition, by saving a little on the processor and buying a product from AMD, you can spend the extra money on a good video card, the performance of which can make a lot more difference in games.

Which AMD or Intel processor should you choose for modern games?

When choosing a processor, first of all, decide on your needs and capabilities. From a neutral point of view, if the high price does not bother you, of course choose Intel. If you are financially strapped but still want to buy a processor with almost equal efficiency and performance, AMD will be the best choice. In addition, processor versions vary greatly; it is necessary to familiarize yourself with the prices of a particular product in advance and, if possible, not neglect reviews and synthetic tests.

Which is better - AMD processor or Intel processor? This issue is constantly the subject of heated debate on the Internet. Owners of components of one and another brand argue fiercely with each other, although in fact in most cases they dealt only with their “favorites”. Accordingly, during such a dialogue, it is not possible to establish the truth.

We will approach the comparison as an independent party and compare both solutions according to a number of distinctive parameters

Price policy

The first thing most people pay attention to is the price of the processor. After all, not everyone can afford to spend an extra hundred dollars on computer components, and it is not advisable to overpay in all cases.

AMD processors can be safely classified as middle and even economy class. If you are very limited in budget, but your goal is to assemble a current generation system, then you should give preference to this company. For example, a quad-core AMD FX-4350 with a frequency of 4.2 GHz costs about four and a half thousand rubles (as of the beginning of 2014), and the most expensive of the freely available AMD FX X8 9590 models costs just over ten thousand.

Intel took a different path, significantly increasing the prices of their processors. Therefore, they are unlikely to be an economical solution for the work computer of an accountant or office employee. The cost of mid-level Intel Core i5 and Intel Core i7 models ranges from six to ten thousand rubles (there are cheaper and more expensive configurations, but we won’t take them into account). The top six-core i7 on the s-2011, in general, costs from 32 thousand rubles. The difference with AMD's offerings is clearly not in Intel's favor, but everything falls into place when you look at both processors in action.

Working capabilities

What we buy a powerful processor for is its performance, speed, and ability to solve the tasks assigned to it. Let's see what both companies can offer their clients in this regard.

AMD, although not a stellar performer, offers an excellent cost-to-performance ratio. When configured correctly, everything works stably and does not cause any complaints. Multitasking is perfectly implemented - with an AMD processor you can easily run several applications at the same time: unpack an archive, surf the browser, play music in the player, install a repack of a game, and so on. A similar Intel model will show much more modest results in this regard. It is also worth paying attention to the predisposition to overclocking: the performance of most AMD processors can be increased without problems by 10-20% compared to factory settings using standard software tools.

With the exception of multitasking, Intel is ahead of AMD in everything. Already due to the fact that application and game developers optimize their creations specifically for this brand of processors, Intel’s performance is significantly higher. In addition, the clock speed of the second and third level memory is much faster, and work with RAM is implemented at the highest level. Working with 3D graphics, editing photos and videos, and other resource-intensive tasks - it is recommended to use Intel solutions for these purposes (as long as one running application is active, there is a significant increase in performance). For the same reason, Intel is the favorite brand of processors among computer game players, where CPU power plays the second most important role after the power of the video card.

Energy consumption and heat dissipation

A very important criterion not only for those who want to save money, but also for owners, for example, of laptops. The lower the power consumption, the longer the device will last without recharging. With heat generation, everything is clear - overheating leads to interruptions in operation and failure of components.

AMD brand processors consume comparatively more energy than their competitors, which is why you need to be more careful when choosing a motherboard and power supply. Otherwise, critical problems, brakes, and freezes may occur. The same applies to heat dissipation, which is quite high (especially in older models), which is why the standard cooler supplied with the processor cannot cope with cooling under increased load. It is strongly recommended that when buying a CPU from AMD, you also purchase high-quality cooling from Zalman or another well-known company - it will also make much less noise during operation.

Intel. As I said earlier, in most cases they are much more economical and heat up less (average AMD ones are 125 Watts vs 95 Watts Intel ones). However, there were some exceptions here. The older Intel Core i5 and i7 models have already caught up with AMD's flagships and even exceeded their power consumption by 5 Watts with all the ensuing consequences. Now, buying a high-quality motherboard, power supply and good cooling has become a top priority for anyone who uses their computer to its full potential. After all, it’s one thing to come to terms with the loss of a cheap budget processor, and another thing to “lose a large sum of money.”

backward compatibility

The presence of backward compatibility in the processor allows it to be used with other computer components or software technologies that can already be called outdated.

AMD is focusing on multi-platform. That is, if you have an old motherboard with an AM2 or AM2+ socket, you can easily insert not only processors with the same name, but also AM3 solutions. For example, having a system with a combination of an m2n-mx motherboard and a Phenom X3 8450 processor, it is quite possible to remove the old processor and install a Phenom II X4 955, almost doubling the performance. Thus, AMD becomes an ideal option for lovers of step-by-step upgrades.

Intel processors, on the contrary, cannot be called universal. Each new line is released on a new platform (with the exception of LGA 1155 processors), which leads to the need to also replace the motherboard during the update. In principle, if you think logically, expensive solutions from Intel are bought not just to surf the Internet and watch movies, but for more resource-intensive tasks. That is, you cannot limit yourself to one processor - you need good RAM, a video card, and a powerful power supply. Therefore, it cannot be said that Intel’s single-platform nature is such a big drawback.

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

Major CPU Manufacturers

Everyone understands perfectly well that there are two leading companies in the computing market that are engaged in the development and production of the Central Processing Unit (central processing unit), or, more simply put, 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 from either Intel or , so it’s no secret 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 choice dilemma - what is preferable - Intel or AMD?

Whatever you say, there is not and cannot be a definite answer to this question, since both manufacturers have enormous potential, and their CPUs are capable of meeting the current requirements.

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

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

Let's 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.

Advantages and disadvantages of Intel processors

So, what are the advantages of Intel processors?

First of all, this is very high performance and speed in applications and games, which are most optimized for Intel processors.
Under the control of these processors, the system operates with maximum stability.
It is worth noting that the second and third level memory of Intel CPUs operates at higher speeds than in similar processors from AMD.
Multithreading, which is implemented by Intel in CPUs such as , plays a big role in performance when working with optimized applications.

Advantages and disadvantages of AMD processors

The advantages of AMD processors include, first of all, their affordability in terms of cost, which is perfectly combined with performance.
A huge advantage is the multi-platform, which allows you to replace one processor model with another without the need to change the motherboard.
That is, a processor designed for socket AM3 can be installed on socket AM2+ without any negative consequences.
One cannot fail to note multitasking, which many AMD processors cope well with, simultaneously running three applications.
In addition, FX series processors have quite good overclocking potential, which is sometimes extremely necessary.

The disadvantages of AMD CPUs include higher power consumption than that of Intel, as well as operation of the second and third level cache memory at lower speeds.
It should also be noted that most processors belonging to the FX line require additional cooling, which will have to be purchased separately.
And another disadvantage is that fewer games and applications are adapted and written for the AMD processor than for Intel.

Current connectors from Intel

Today, many leading manufacturers of central processors are equipped with two current connectors. From Intel they are as follows:

LGA 2011 v3 is a combined connector that is aimed at quickly assembling a high-performance personal computer for both servers and 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, such processors provide unprecedented performance. It must be said that within the framework of such a platform an integrated subsystem is not used. Unlocking the potential of such chips is only possible with the help of discrete graphics. To do this, you should use only the best video cards;
Thanks to LGA, you can easily organize not only a high-performance computing system, but also a budget PC. For example, a socket LGA 1151 It is perfect for creating a mid-price computing station, while at the same time it will have a powerful integrated graphics core of the Intel Graphics series and support DDR4 memory.

Current AMD connectors

Today AMD is promoting the following processor sockets:

The main computing platform for such a developer is considered AM3+. The most productive CPUs are considered to be the FX model range, which includes up to eight computing modules. In addition, such a platform supports an integrated graphics subsystem. However, here the graphics core is included in the motherboard, and is not integrated into the semiconductor crystals;
the latest modern AMD processor socket – FM3+. AMD's new CPUs are intended to be used in desktop computers and media centers not only at entry-level, but also at mid-level. Thanks to this, the most modern integrated solution will be available to the average user for a fairly small amount.

Working capabilities

Many people first pay attention to the price of the processor. 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 outstanding achievements.

But this processor represents an excellent price-performance ratio. If you configure it correctly, you can expect stable operation without any complaints.

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

With its help, you can simultaneously install the game and surf the vast expanses of the Internet.

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

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

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

Intel beats AMD in almost everything except multitasking. In addition, work with Intel has always been at the highest 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 to recharge.

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

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

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

If it comes to heavy multitasking, then it is better to choose Intel, since it has HyperTreasing technology.

However, this advantage can only be exploited 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 an AMD processor with.

So, there is a big difference between intel and amd processor sockets. When choosing the right option, consider the differences between them listed in this article. This will make choosing the right option much easier.