# Intel vs AMD



## ABenz99 (May 31, 2013)

I am building a compter (for music production, gaming, video editing, programing, virtual machines, and web design) and am having trouble deciding on a processer and motherboard. There are two processers I am looking at on newegg:

-Intel I7 LGA2011 6-core, 3.2ghz (3.8ghz turbo) for $569
-AMD FX8350 Vishera Socket AM3+125W 8-core 4.0ghz (4.2turbo) for $199

It seems obvious that I should choose the AMD processer, but I've heard they're lower quality, and the motherboards dont have PCI express 3.0 (which I need for a graphics card). I want a high quality computer, and don't want to cheap-out on the processer, but the AMD one has a lot more power for a lot less money.  As for the motherboard; will AMD make a model with pci 3.0 in the next few months? Or should I just buy a pci 2.0 graphics card, instad of a 3.0?


----------



## jonnyp11 (May 31, 2013)

The amd mobos have pcie 3.0 AFAIK and you dont need it anyways, it's the same slot as 2.0 but a higher bandwidth. The only thing that would be held back by 2.0 would be a 680 or 7970 and above, and really in gaming they still arent other than maybe maxing bf3 on a tri 1440p setup.

The 8350 is fine but a 3930k is better. In actuallity the 8350 is 4 cores + 4*3/4 cores, they share some resources and they dont process as much information per cycle (ghz is a measure of cycles per second). A 3930k is 6 full cores that do more per cycle, and each is threaded as 2 cores so they can get more done at once. Price to performance, a 3770k is a lot better, but if you can afford it a 3930k is a lot stronger, but price doesnt scale to performance so the faster it is the higher the price.

Check out anandtech.com's benchmarks section, you can compare them.

And there is a microcenter near you, st. Louis park, and you can get processors there for a good bit less, plus motherboards are normally good too, and with lga1155 and am3+ several processors have combo discounts.

But if you do look at the 3770k, then wait till next month cuz the 4770k will be out, but the 4000 series six core processors wont be out for a little while longer AFAIK, they normally come out a while later


----------



## 2048Megabytes (Jun 1, 2013)

I would not even look at a Core i7 3930K processor.  The Intel Core i7 3820 and the AMD FX-8350 Vishera processors are very powerful and will leave you with more money in your pocket.


----------



## ABenz99 (Jun 1, 2013)

What about the Intel i7 3820 and AMD FX 8350? Again, AMD is cheaper, and more powerful, but is it better or worse than Intel for what I intend to do?


----------



## jonnyp11 (Jun 1, 2013)

Did you read my post, AMD is nowhere near more powerful. Look on anandtech to see the difference and judge for yourself if the price is worth the performance.


----------



## ABenz99 (Jun 1, 2013)

Sorry, but I was a little confused. What exactly measures the amount of information per cycle (if GHz is cycles per second). None of the specifications on newegg showed any problems with the AMD. However, there were probably some specs I overlooked.


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 1, 2013)

For a given clock speed Intel has a higher IPC. Plus your comparing a 570 buck processor to a 199 buck one. Why where you going with a socket 2011 instead of a socket 1155 with like a i7 3770K for 330 bucks. For the price the FX8320/8350 will do good if the programs your running are highly threaded.


----------



## spirit (Jun 1, 2013)

Honestly, depending on how much you want to spend, I'd grab an AMD FX-8320 or an i7 3770K. The 8320 is cheaper but slower than the i7, but the 3770K is about as powerful as you'll need and can easily be overclocked.

The 3770K should be fine for what you want to do. I do most of the stuff you're doing on an i5 2500K overclocked to 4.3GHz and don't have a problem.


----------



## Darren (Jun 1, 2013)

To clarify. The 8320 and the 8350 are the same chip but the the 8350 is clocked higher out of the box. If you're comfortable with doing some slight overclocking save the money and get the 8320. 

Personally I'd get an 8320 and a good water cooling set up and overclock it to high heaven.


----------



## spirit (Jun 2, 2013)

If you can afford a 3770K I'd get one of those over the 8320 though. The 3770K also overclocks well. 

It's faster than an 8320 out of the box and once overclocked it will leave the 8320 behind.

But if you want to save money, the 8320 is a good option.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 2, 2013)

spirit said:


> If you can afford a 3770K I'd get one of those over the 8320 though. The 3770K also overclocks well.
> 
> It's faster than an 8320 out of the box and once overclocked it will leave the 8320 behind.
> 
> But if you want to save money, the 8320 is a good option.



The i7 also costs 2 times (or more) as much as an FX8320.


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 2, 2013)

Encoding would be the only thing that an AMD 8350 would even come close to the I7 3770k's performance.

You guys all seem to think you can overclock an 8320 as much as an 8350 can overclock, which is not true at all.  8320's are basically the rejects that didn't make it to 8350 specs, and they cannot overclock as well at all.  The average 8350 daily overclock is 200-400mhz higher on the same voltage.

With that said, the 3770k is in a completely different league than anything AMD has.  It's absolutely worth every penny more than an FX-8350.

You look at stock comparisons of the 3770k and FX-8350, the 3770k destroys it in 98% of apps with usually a 30% or better margin.  And it's clocked 500mhz slower.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=551


----------



## jonnyp11 (Jun 3, 2013)

plus, 4770k is out and it's a decent upgrade from the 3770k


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 3, 2013)

Yeah, might as well go with the 4770k since it's out, it's only another $20.


----------



## Eric4753 (Jun 3, 2013)

I have the i5 3570k for my rig and it is pretty much equivalent to the 3770k only cheaper same performance and everything. The only difference is the 3770k is more fir for editing programs etc...


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 3, 2013)

Eric4753 said:


> I have the i5 3570k for my rig and it is pretty much equivalent to the 3770k only cheaper same performance and everything. The only difference is the 3770k is more fir for editing programs etc...



Which, if you even bothered to read the OP, he is doing.



ABenz99 said:


> I am building a compter (for music production, gaming, video editing, programing, virtual machines, and web design)



Though, I agree for the price the 4670k is a better bang for the buck than a 4770k, there will be better performance with the 4770k with what he's doing so if he can swing the extra bucks why not.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 3, 2013)

jonnyp11 said:


> plus, 4770k is out and it's a decent upgrade from the 3770k



It turns out disappointing to me...
Only 1-3% improved CPU performance in most cases, 5-7% in less benchmarks.
The 3770k sometimes even pass his successor.
Only graphics, power consumption and overclock facilities are really improved. But the temperature problem from ivy is still not fixed.

This gives AMD the time to catch up a bit.


----------



## spirit (Jun 4, 2013)

From what I understand the biggest improvement that the 4770K has is the onboard graphics.

But I don't think it will give AMD 'a chance to catch up' to be perfectly honest.


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 4, 2013)

AMD isn't even interested in catching up anyway.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 4, 2013)

87dtna said:


> AMD isn't even interested in catching up anyway.



They want to compete with the new centurion chips, but the TDP is a very large miss for this cpu...


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 5, 2013)

SmileMan said:


> They want to compete with the new centurion chips, but the TDP is a very large miss for this cpu...


 
Wont do much good, dont know if its really true or not. The price seems to be really over the top for limited supply edition which probably wont overclock but a few 100 over the 8350.

I've heard they have been quiet about it, but Steamroller will be released pretty soon.


----------



## ABenz99 (Jun 6, 2013)

So after reading everyone's reply's and talking to a few people, I decided I should go  with this processor, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115229, Is that a good choice? Also it has a LGA 2011 socket, so I can upgrade to a six core model in the future if I get the money.


----------



## ABenz99 (Jun 6, 2013)

This is the motherboard I plan on getting with it, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131800


----------



## FuryRosewood (Jun 6, 2013)

if you can spare the extra 50 bucks id grab the Deluxe. Comes with Wifi and other goodies. I use the board, works well. The 3820 is a fine chip, will oc to 4.3ghz without issues, as long as you invest in cooling, id recommend the h100 or h100i for that cpu as long as the case supports the cooler.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 6, 2013)

StrangleHold said:


> Wont do much good, dont know if its really true or not. The price seems to be really over the top for limited supply edition which probably wont overclock but a few 100 over the 8350.
> 
> I've heard they have been quiet about it, but Steamroller will be released pretty soon.



http://wccftech.com/gigabyte-confirms-upcoming-5ghz-amd-fx-processors-computex-2013/
They're pretty sure about 2 cpus FX8750 and FX 9000.
First cpus with steamroller cores will be kaveri in the 4Q of this year, FX chips will come later, probably next year.
I also heard that some kaveri chips are already sent to consumers for testing, but the date is stated very clear Q4 2013.


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 6, 2013)

ABenz99 said:


> So after reading everyone's reply's and talking to a few people, I decided I should go  with this processor, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115229, Is that a good choice? Also it has a LGA 2011 socket, so I can upgrade to a six core model in the future if I get the money.





ABenz99 said:


> This is the motherboard I plan on getting with it, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131800



Quite honestly, the 4770k easily outperforms the 3820 in everything.  The 3820 does not have a completely unlocked multiplier, it has a limit.  The 4770k is faster clock for clock, but also overclocks higher and easier (you can just use the multiplier to overclock, no need to touch the base clock).

Also, motherboards for the 4770k are 1/2 as much.  Case in point, this ASRock board has tons of bells and whistles for only $170!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157371

Being able to future upgrade to a hex core is not worth the current price you'd pay for outdated hardware now.  Plus, the 4770k competes against the 3930k hex core quite well, and is only slightly slower in heavily threaded applications.

Take a look at the bench comparisons-

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/836?vs=552

90% of applications are only single threaded, which the 4770k is the king of.  7% more use 4 or less threads, and only 3% of things you can do on a PC can utilize more than 4 threads (though the 4770k has 8 threads so it's still not slow at anything).


So, the motherboard/cpu combo you'd be saving $90 on, the 4770k is far more energy efficient, it's the latest cutting edge technology not a year and a half old, the CPU coolers for it are more readily available and are cheaper, it overclocks easier, runs cooler, and is faster in most applications than even a 3930k.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 6, 2013)

87dtna said:


> Quite honestly, the 4770k easily outperforms the 3820 in everything.  The 3820 does not have a completely unlocked multiplier, it has a limit.  The 4770k is faster clock for clock, but also overclocks higher and easier (you can just use the multiplier to overclock, no need to touch the base clock).
> 
> Also, motherboards for the 4770k are 1/2 as much.  Case in point, this ASRock board has tons of bells and whistles for only $170!
> 
> ...



You really think the 4770K is heaven, but it's only about 3-5% faster (or less) then a 3770K in terms of cpu performance...


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 6, 2013)

Well I'm not disagreeing with that, and nowhere did I say it wasn't.  I compared it to the I7 3820, in which case it out classes it in every aspect.  There's just no point in buying a 3770k anymore when a 4770k is $30 more.  Plus, you get the newer socket 1150 with the Z87 chipset which supports more sata 6gb/s ports than a Z77 does.  You can now RAID more than 2 sata 6gb/s drives on an intel board finally.


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 6, 2013)

SmileMan said:


> http://wccftech.com/gigabyte-confirms-upcoming-5ghz-amd-fx-processors-computex-2013/
> They're pretty sure about 2 cpus FX8750 and FX 9000.
> First cpus with steamroller cores will be kaveri in the 4Q of this year, FX chips will come later, probably next year.
> I also heard that some kaveri chips are already sent to consumers for testing, but the date is stated very clear Q4 2013.


 
Still not sure about it. Dont know why they would call it a 8750 and 9000. They already had a Phenom 8000 and 9000 series, even a 8750. Instead of like a 8390 and 8400. could leave open 8370 to slid in another one. 

Heard that Steamroller will be the last AM socket. From then on they will be all one socket FM. Dont know if the FX will disappear and they all will be APUs. Then I've heard there will be a FX, but both APU and FX will fit the same socket. I know the steamroller FX is suppost to have clock mesh.


----------



## 2048Megabytes (Jun 6, 2013)

StrangleHold said:


> Heard that Steamroller will be the last AM socket. From then on they will be all one socket FM. Dont know if the FX will disappear and they all will be APUs. Then I've heard there will be a FX, but both APU and FX will fit the same socket. I know the steamroller FX is supposed to have clock mesh.



Is Advanced Micro Devices going to up the pin count on future processors?  Intel has got 2011 contacts on their Socket LGA2011.  Likely this helps with processing power.


----------



## FuryRosewood (Jun 7, 2013)

I always laugh when someone brings up the x770 is faster than a 3820, but you are comparing the entry level chip of socket 2011 to the top of the basket chip to 115x. If need be, they could swap the chip to a 3930k or 4930k, when the latter comes out, then see who is truely the workhorse (spoiler alert, it wont be haswell )


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 7, 2013)

2048Megabytes said:


> Is Advanced Micro Devices going to up the pin count on future processors? Intel has got 2011 contacts on their Socket LGA2011. Likely this helps with processing power.


 
Have no idea. If there is still a FX around after Steamroller both the FX and APU is suppost to be a single socket. Dont think pin count has anything to do with it. If pin count was needed I dont see why they couldnt have added them to FM2 and AM3+. The FM2 only has 904 even with a built in GPU, AM3+ has 940. Intel standard is 1155. The FX on AM3+ doesnt have to deal with a GPU/PCIe traffic. Intel Core 2 on 775 was faster then a AM2 Athlon 64 with 165 less pins. AMD is just suffering from a IPC lag because of the size of L1 and speed of the L2. Plus needs dedicated decoders. A few others.


----------



## Pichu (Jun 7, 2013)

I still use a AMD Athlon II CPU in my laptop and it has served me well.

I don't get how a CPU with the same clock speed is any better then another of the same speed and other things like how it handles Process Control Blocks etc...but then again I am not all knowing when it comes to CPU's.


----------



## 2048Megabytes (Jun 7, 2013)

StrangleHold said:


> Socket AM3+ has 940.



I thought that Socket AM3+ processors had 938-pins.  The Socket AM3+ layout has 942-pin holes, but the processor has 940-pins?

I think it is good that Socket AM4 will be the last legacy socket for AMD processors in this series.  It is time to move on and up.  

I am personally impressed by Advanced Micro Devices performance improvement from the Phenom II 980 to the Vishera series of processors.


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 7, 2013)

FuryRosewood said:


> I always laugh when someone brings up the x770 is faster than a 3820, but you are comparing the entry level chip of socket 2011 to the top of the basket chip to 115x. If need be, they could swap the chip to a 3930k or 4930k, when the latter comes out, then see who is truely the workhorse (spoiler alert, it wont be haswell )



If you read my post at all, most of the time I was comparing the 4770k to the 3930k.  

Atleast 90% of apps are single threaded, which the 4770k is king of, and it will also easily beat the 3930k in everything up to 4 threads as well.  Probably only 3 to 5% of things you can do on a PC use more than 4 threads anyway, and the 4770k is certainly not what you would call slow at any of them.  The 3930k does not ''cream'' the 4770k at anything at all.  And it's certainly not worth paying $300 for a 3820 now and $500+ for a 4930k later.  And the 4930k is only Ivy Bridge anway, so the 4770k will still be faster in single threaded before it's even released.


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 7, 2013)

2048Megabytes said:


> I thought that Socket AM3+ processors had 938-pins. The Socket AM3+ layout has 942-pin holes, but the processor has 940-pins?


 
Was thinking AM2/+ for some reason.


----------



## FuryRosewood (Jun 9, 2013)

87dtna said:


> If you read my post at all, most of the time I was comparing the 4770k to the 3930k.
> 
> Atleast 90% of apps are single threaded, which the 4770k is king of, and it will also easily beat the 3930k in everything up to 4 threads as well.  Probably only 3 to 5% of things you can do on a PC use more than 4 threads anyway, and the 4770k is certainly not what you would call slow at any of them.  The 3930k does not ''cream'' the 4770k at anything at all.  And it's certainly not worth paying $300 for a 3820 now and $500+ for a 4930k later.  And the 4930k is only Ivy Bridge anway, so the 4770k will still be faster in single threaded before it's even released.



Even with that single threaded performance you are raving about, if the app needs more threads than what the 4xxx chips can deliver, SB-E tears it apart due to simple math. More is MORE. If its only working a single worker Haswell is fine for you, but if you need 12 whole workers, SB-E and IB-E will get the job done. I still think having more workers is better for me, if its not for you, that's great.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 9, 2013)

Most of the singlethreaded applications only perform small tasks, so you won't see a big difference between AMD and Intel. If the app needs to perform a bigger task, he'll use more threads to get it done faster (most newer apps).
Also, threads do matter in terms of fluency, if you run multiple programs at once, you'll want more threads. Also the latest games require more threads, you'll maybe get good fps, but you'll also have huge drops in fps at some point. (For CPUs with 2 or less threads)


----------



## 87dtna (Jun 9, 2013)

FuryRosewood said:


> if the app needs more threads than what the 4xxx chips can deliver, SB-E tears it apart due to simple math.



No, it doesn't.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/836?vs=552

Take a look at encoding benches, it's 26 VS 22 seconds.  OMG 4 seconds, that was so worth that extra several hundred dollars right?

If you compare the 4770k to the 3820, the 4770k beats the 3820 by a LOT more than the 3930k beats the 4770k.



SmileMan said:


> if you run multiple programs at once, you'll want more threads.



Probably the only valid point brought up so far...but the 4770k is faster clock for clock PLUS it can overclock better too.  It does even the playing field somewhat.  

If you look at cinebench, that simulates stressing every thread the CPU has.  The 3930k was only 6% faster with it's 12 threads than a 4770k with 8.  Those 8 threads have such higher efficiency it gets the job done nearly as fast anyway.

The main problem is he cannot afford the 3930k right off the bat.  Buying a 3820 to eventually upgrade to a 3930k or 4930k is just a huge waste of money.  First of all, it will most likely never happen.  He'll be pretty happy with the 3820's performance because it's still a strong CPU for multitasking so he will never upgrade.  SO, just get the 4770k now and get it over with because the 4770k whips the 3820 like a red headed step child.



SmileMan said:


> Also the latest games require more threads, you'll maybe get good fps, but you'll also have huge drops in fps at some point. (For CPUs with 2 or less threads)



When?  2-3 years from now when this hardware is obsolete anyway and you'll be upgrading again?  The 4770k is plenty future proof for 100 FPS+ gaming for atleast 2 years if not 3, I garauntee it (meaning the CPU will not be the bottleneck).

And whats with this 2 or less threads, when did that even enter the discussion and why was that even said?  We're comparing the 4770k to a 3930k here (or 3820), nothing is even less than 8 threads in this discussion let alone 2.



I seriously don't think anyone realizes just how much more money he'll spend going with socket 2011.  First of all, he's gonna buy the 3820 first for $300.  Once the 4930k is released, he'll be LUCKY to get $200 for it so bam right there a $100 loss.  The 4930k will be ATLEAST $600, so right there $250 more than a 4770k so we're up to $350 now.  Next, the motherboard is $130 more expensive, and throw in another $20 for having to have additional cooling.  You'd possibly need to step up your power supply another 50-100w, throw in $25 for a better PSU.  You need quad channel ram, so throw in $50 for an extra 2 sticks of ram.  Grand total, $575 more than a 4770k.  And thats only if the 4930k is released at the same price the 3930k was, it may be more.  So possibly $600+ more expense than a 4770k.


----------



## spirit (Jun 9, 2013)

I very rarely recommend LGA 2011. I tend to steer people towards 1155 (or 1150 now) with an i7 3770K or 4770K. Really, the 3770K and 4770K are plenty powerful enough for just about anything, especially once you've overclocked.

I'd recommend a 4770K and a Z87 board to this guy.


----------



## Okedokey (Jun 9, 2013)

For 80% of consumers, its pretty hard to go beyond the 4770K and just use onboard graphics.

For the rest of us, the CPU is almost never the bottle anymore.


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 11, 2013)

SmileMan said:


> http://wccftech.com/gigabyte-confirms-upcoming-5ghz-amd-fx-processors-computex-2013/
> They're pretty sure about 2 cpus FX8750 and FX 9000.
> First cpus with steamroller cores will be kaveri in the 4Q of this year, FX chips will come later, probably next year.
> I also heard that some kaveri chips are already sent to consumers for testing, but the date is stated very clear Q4 2013.


 
Looks now to be true. Seems it will be a FX 9590 at 5ghz. and a FX 9370 at 4.7ghz on turbo.


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 12, 2013)

StrangleHold said:


> Looks now to be true. Seems it will be a FX 9590 at 5ghz. and a FX 9370 at 4.7ghz on turbo.



Yep, the TDP is not sure yet. But probably 220 like stated before in the rumors.
The base clock will probably be 4.8ghz.
I read somewhere that the price would be 800$, but I don't believe that...
Right price/performance with powerconsumption as 3rd factor would bring it around the price of the new i7 4770k or less. It offers better multi, a bit worse singlethreaded.

I used the average of some FX8350s @ 5Ghz to have a *prediction* of the performance.
*But this proves nothing, because the turbo is 5Ghz, not all cores*. So *singlethreaded *will be about right (*21%* better seems about right), *multithreaded *(*24%* better, probably more like *20%* if it's only turbo) and *4 threads* (*25%* better with all cores @ 5ghz, more like *20-21%* with only 1 @ 5ghz)) could be a little less.
In *total * it's about *23.4%* faster with every core set to 5ghz, more like *20%* in real.

(black hole beta 4.2)





Sad I don't have any i7 4770k or i7 3930k stock results...
Also, if you want me to add some cpu to compare, tell me.

Also have to mention that these chips will be sold to system builders first, we don't know or they will get available at the retail market at all.


----------



## jonnyp11 (Jun 12, 2013)

Must add, couldn't it be an early revision of steamroller? Which would bring theperformance up even more


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 12, 2013)

jonnyp11 said:


> Must add, couldn't it be an early revision of steamroller? Which would bring theperformance up even more



from what I've heard, it's just the same piledriver architecture without real changes. Only better binned to get it so high.


----------



## jonnyp11 (Jun 12, 2013)

Wonder if it will ship with a water cooler like they offered the 8350s, but might not have anything like the 3930k, dont think they come with coolers


----------



## Virssagòn (Jun 12, 2013)

jonnyp11 said:


> Wonder if it will ship with a water cooler like they offered the 8350s, but might not have anything like the 3930k, dont think they come with coolers



Read whole my post, it's available for systembuilders this summer, not in the retail market. That will be later or maybe even never.


----------



## jonnyp11 (Jun 12, 2013)

I know, but forgot  read something about it several days ago.


----------



## StrangleHold (Jun 13, 2013)

No, these are not Streamroller. Steamroller doubles up on decodes. Dynamic L2, which really just saves power. Also heard it will increase L1 cache size. Will have clock mesh. Plus it will be on 28nm. Bulk


----------

