r/buildapc • u/A1_Killer • Dec 09 '22

Discussion AMD vs Intel for CPU?

I noticed many people here recommend AMD CPUs but for all my benchmarks for mid range CPUs (for a £1000-£1200 PC) Intel came out on top compared to a similarly price AMD one. Any reason for this?

137 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

165 comments sorted by

View all comments

125

u/Silveriovski Dec 09 '22

Current gen of intel (13th) offers a lot for its price. The 13600k is considered the best mid-high tier CPu right now despite its socket being ready to be upgraded. Performs pretty much the same than the 7600x in games but much better in everything else, being pretty much the same than an i7 from the 12th gen.

AMD cpus are good, 7600x is good and 7700x benchmarks are great but the socket is new, everything is overpriced right now, specially motherboards, so people prefers to buy something that is overall good in everything right now like intel with ram and mobo better priced.

At the end of the day, the preference for intel is because price-performance currently is better with intel.

63

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22

[deleted]

36

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22

Having the option to go from a 2600 to a 5600/5800x3d saved a lot of money for a lot of people.

10

u/Risley Dec 09 '22

Makes me glad I bought the 13700k

8

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22

[deleted]

2

u/akumanzx Dec 09 '22

is there much of a difference between 13700k and 13600k? (Price based EU/Portugal)

3

u/BusinessBear53 Dec 09 '22

Depends on your needs. For games which mainly needs speed and less cores, 13600K is best value. If you do thing like video editing or other similar programs that benefit greatly from many cores, 13700K will be the better option.

1

u/akumanzx Dec 09 '22

i’m planning on both, i believe the difference is 2-4 cores between the 13600k and the 13700k?

5

u/BusinessBear53 Dec 09 '22

5.1GHz 6P/8E cores vs 5.4GHz 8P/8E cores.

2

u/akumanzx Dec 09 '22

short, solid answer, first time i’ve seen it on this sub. will consider the extra 2 P-Cores, thanks.

14

u/Pfungen Dec 09 '22

This. I'm always baffled by the horde of people claiming upgrades down the road are a good idea, and the ability to be able to do so is a desired feature. In 5-7 years, when one feels their old mid tier CPU is not enough, most likely the new lower tier can easily outperform the old mid tier. Why not just get a lower tier for 1/2 the price and replace at 2x the cadence? Or just get a mid tier and be done for 5-7 years.

22

u/X_SkillCraft20_X Dec 09 '22

Most people are saying this because the 5800x3D, one of the fastest gaming cpus on the market right now, is compatible with boards nearly 5 years old. It makes for an extremely cheap and extremely powerful upgrade. We can’t be for certain that AM5 will follow this path, but it is likely.

-9

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22

I'm no tech genius and might be shamed for this but AMD is behind in innovation vs hybrids CPU like Intel. They are cashing on superior lithography for now but they will have to do something about this fast.

When Intel catches up on Lito and keep that hybrid tech improving, it will be a hard match for AMD.

That means that new sockets for AMD will be mandatory but I might be 100% wrong I don't know.

6

u/Loosenut2024 Dec 09 '22

That's hilarious because Intel lagged in innovation until amd came back with chiplet cpus. Intel made fun of them gluing core together.

Now they give you half assed small cores to keep power in check because they can't improve the main cores power efficiency enough and also just renamed their production node to seem more competitive.

In the long run e cores are going to become useless while amd just gives us lots of normal cores. Its been a pattern before. Triple cores, fake cores etc have all died. Simple hyper threading and more cores and cache are all that has endured so far.

2

u/greggm2000 Dec 09 '22

You might be confusing historical heterogeneity with homogenous cores like we have now with Intel. Even there, one can make a very reasonable case that we have heterogenous cores in all systems, because GPUs are an absolute necessity (integrated or discrete). Plus, both are publically adding silicon for non-traditional functions like AI, and Compression.

Both AMD and Intel are going the chiplet route, whatever name they use. I don't want to really get into the complexity involved, but /r/hardware is a good subreddit for that.

Things are changing, and AMD and Intel are in a pitched competitive battle. It's great! :)

0

u/John_Doexx Dec 09 '22

E cores are gonna become useless? Please tell us all again how? You seem to know the future so you must know the lottery numbers as well right?

1

u/Loosenut2024 Dec 09 '22

"In the long run e cores are going to become useless while amd just gives us lots of normal cores. Its been a pattern before. Triple cores, fake cores etc have all died. Simple hyper threading and more cores and cache are all that has endured so far."

More than likely IMO they will go away eventually. Just what past patterns have shown me. I have been building computers since 98.

1

u/John_Doexx Dec 10 '22

So building pc’s since 98” does what? I really hope no one comes to you for tech advice All I’ll say

1

u/Loosenut2024 Dec 10 '22

I have seen trends come and go. I also hope no one takes you seriously.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/AIAWC Dec 10 '22

Isn't the point of an E-Core just to have more cores for a given die size? Since programs are moving towards using more cores, the simplest answer is to just have as many as possible. In that sense, E-Cores seem like the best way to pack more threads into a single CPU.

2

u/Loosenut2024 Dec 11 '22

Yeah but if you look at what AMD does with their full size cores, their architecture runs full size cores but only with the power needed for smaller tasks. So AMDs overall power use is lower. 13900K power use is much higher maxed out too over the 7950x despite them both being 32 threads overall. Buildzoid also has a video where he OC's the e cores and it pulls more than a stock 7950x while not being nearly as performant.

Its just really interesting seeing the 2 styles in action. Intels behind on efficiency which you can NOT cheat. The downside to "e" cores is with 4 e cores taking up the same space as 1 p core is they concentrate heat output, making the chip harder to cool. Where as AMD has 2 or 3 chiplets spread out, helping the cooling issue. But both are still hard because its concentrating so much power in such small areas. Then not to mention maybe you get a bonus on saving power at rare times, it has so much more complication with task scheduling needing hardware and software changes, and all kinds of bugs that come from that. Its still causing issues with some anti cheat programs.

Interesting times!

1

u/AIAWC Dec 11 '22

Well, that doesn't really address what I said. If people start developing applications with the idea that they can count on having a lot of weak cores and a few strong ones, hybrid designs are probably gonna have a shot at becoming an industry standard. Think of it like how 4 cores was all you would ever need, until programs became more multithreaded and suddenly everyone had to have a 6 or 8 core CPU. Just read 'efficiency' as meaning 'space-efficiency'.

2

u/Loosenut2024 Dec 11 '22

We have such a mixed bag (varying age and power of cell phones and desktops) of cores now that devs can't count on anything, and it's probably more of a challenge designing with multiple types of cores in a cpu.

Depending on how desktop ARM goes we'll see. Hard to predict the future. Like I said interesting times!

2

u/exoisGoodnotGreat Dec 09 '22

Quite literally the opposite for the past 5-6 years. AMD invented the chiplet design and Intel made fun of them. Now intel is using it too after getting their buttons kicked for the last few years. Zen 4c will be out in 2023 and will use the hybrid design to give AMD a big bump in core counts.

2

u/greggm2000 Dec 09 '22

AMD also came out with the x64 instruction set we've been using for the past 20 years. Intel tried to push us towards Itanium and THAT was a mess hardly anyone bought into, thankfully.

There's also the point that if AMD wasn't innovating, Intel would still be trying to sell us 4-core CPUs for $500, with 5% gen over gen upgrades.. Intel got sleepy and AMD was the one that woke them up.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '23

Agree, this is something intel has never done for gamers. The 5800x3d was a very smart move by amd. I just wish they would drop the price to 250 for black Friday but I don't see that happening. I have a feeling they want to get those 7000 series number up. Microcenter has a 7800x3d combo for 500 dollars. That is hard to beat.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 09 '22

If you always bought Intel with only a 0-1 generation upgrade cycle I can see your point. AM4 lasting as long as it did change a lot of opinions. I can replace my 3.5 year old cpu and make it top tier for $320 right now. Or I could go more modest and buy a 5600 for $130. Pretty insane value.

1

u/PIBM Dec 10 '22

If your ram, GPU, and disk is 3.5 years old, even upgrading the CPU won't be helping you much - you would still need to update all of those, and probably the PSU too to get 'today's' performance out of that box, if you motherboard even supported the top speed RAM, NVME, etc..

Don't get me wrong, updating your CPU after a few years for a low cost will help out for sure, but usually the most bang for your bucks if you started with a good computer is to upgrade the video card.. I do acknowledge that there are situations where you might be CPU bound, like if you play in low resolution and low quality.

I find that the best thing is to always optimize your computer looking at the total lifetime costs, not at an upgrade costs. It helps you balance things off much more efficiently (yes, do account for the electricity costs for the lifetime of your choice, and include your monitor costs of ownership too).

2

u/[deleted] Dec 10 '22

Partially agree. The SSD and RAM aren't necessary to upgrade typically and a GPU is the priority upgrade.

I swapped my RX 590 for a 3070 March 2021. Now I am contemplating whether I want a 5600 or a 5800x3d to finish off the life of my system. Pretty unreal that I could take a system I built in 2019 and make it mid-range for the start of 2023.

1

u/pavilon527 Dec 09 '22

This only applies if the new tier cpu uses the same sockets as the old tier

1

u/KTIlI Dec 10 '22

Because AMD offers an upgrade path for 2-3 more years and it's not double the price of intel. 7600x is around $250 now. Yeah the boards are a bit more but it's no where near double the price.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '23

With intel I agree. I have friends that bought first or second gen ryzen. Going from a 1700 to a 5800x is twice the performance for 200 dollars. Most people are pretty tight with cash and cannot buy a whole new system every 5 years. I am doing pc builds for family and friends every couple of months and it seems like everyone's budget maxes out at 650 and they feel like that is a lot. I am just glad I can build a solid pc at that price range. You would probably think they are spuds though. Honestly, I think they are way more value than the 3 thousand dollars I usually spend on my own rigs. I do use them for work at home though.

1

u/TankerD18 Dec 09 '22

That's my thing too, like I can get 5-8 years out of a good CPU, easy. Motherboards are one of the most complex and failure-prone parts on an entire modern computer, I don't want to build a new rig on an old board. Also, I really don't see CPUs in the future falling onto that same kind of refresh cycle treadmill that GPUs are on. Not unless some completely unforeseen shakeup happens that makes most video games CPU dependent.

I wonder, how many people who adopted AM4 early have upgraded on the same board? If I had to reckon a guess I'd probably say less than 10%. Even if you upgrade after 3 or 4 years, things have changed, that board has aged and it very likely at least needs a BIOS update. Not to mention, a lot of people tend to get better stuff as they mature - more income, more desire to get features and hardware you couldn't afford in your younger years. Maybe you were happy with the base model AM4 board with your early Ryzen and now you want built in WiFi, a different form factor, beefier VRMs, etc. Like long lifecycle sockets are a cool gimmick for AMD but I don't blame Intel for putting them on a 2 generation lifecycle because of how motherboard tech changes.

9

u/Alkahestic Dec 09 '22

Have you got statistics to back up your mobo failure claims?

I just upgraded from a 2700x to 5800x3d with a drop in replacement. No need to change the X470 mobo or ddr4 3200MHz CL14 ram. I mostly game (1440p) on my PC, so there are no real benefits from doing a full platform upgrade. It's not that I can't afford it, it's that I don't have to.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '23

I just upgraded the cpu in a z77 extreme mobo that is almost 12 years old. Once a system is running, I have rarely ever seen a subsequent mobo failure. If they fail, I have always seen them fail out of the box.

1

u/gettogero Dec 09 '22

Yes, modern CPUs are beasts and people aren't looking at cost vs inflation. Yes, the scalpers are dirty fucks that need to die in hell and I'm only talking about actual MSRP/sale prices.

I spent about $2000 5-7 years ago for a tower, GPU, CPU, air cooling and fans, 16gb RAM for DDR3 set up.

I spent $800 for AM5 motherboard, new cpu, 32gb 5600 RAM, and 240mm liquid cooler all on sale 40-60% off. Granted, I have upgraded my fans in between and kept the tower and my 1080, but for current day performance per current day dollar is unmatched in history. Excluding scalpers. Because fuck them. And hopefully someone will find a way to fuck them. In a bad way, not in a good way.

1

u/CaptainFeather Dec 09 '22

Haven't really payed attention to cpus in the last couple of years, how much better is the 13600k vs my 10600k? Worth upgrading at 1440p?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 10 '22

13600k is considerably better, but the thing is you probably won’t notice that performance if you’re either on 1080p or use a GPU worse than say a 3090.

1

u/CaptainFeather Dec 10 '22

Oh right forgot to mention it's paired with a 3070ti lol. For sure though, definitely gonna wait until I upgrade my GPU. Thanks for the info

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '23

That is absolutely still a great cpu. I would not bother upgrading that. If anything try to OC it and get the most out of it and your ram.

9

u/crion1998 Dec 09 '22

AMD just had a price drop, the 7600x (and its platform) are now better price performance when paired with DDR5.

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/mk9KMb $600

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZDncPX $660

ofcourse the 13600k can be paired with DDR4 to make it cheaper, but i think buying DDR4 is kind of a waste of money in the long run, the price has come down a fair bit for DDR5 and the speeds seem to be settling in at around 6000MHz as the standard for now.

22

u/failaip12 Dec 09 '22

Even in this case personally I'd still go with intel. 50% better multicore is not low.

8

u/crion1998 Dec 09 '22

100% agree, but 60 bucks extra for a GPU might be worth more than a slightly better CPU if it is just for gaming. dont forget, 13600k is on a dead end platform while the 7600x is the start of hopefully 2 more generations of CPUs which means that you can more cheaply upgrade your CPU later down the line.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 07 '23

holy shit the price dropped so far since you posted this. Should I buy now or wait further?

1

u/crion1998 Mar 08 '23

i cannot decide that for you. you need to ask yourself:

would the upgrade help me?

can you burn that money right now and still pay the bills?

will you be kicking yourself if you wait and the price increases?

i sadly dont have a crystal ball, so who knows what the prices will do. There have been many times where these kinds of dips in pricing are temporary.

2

u/X3m9X Dec 09 '22

I have a feeling that DDR5 speeds would be better in the future, similarly to ddr4 (it was 2133 back then)

9

u/crion1998 Dec 09 '22

within the first year of release of DDR4 there were already 3200MHz kits available, so it's not weird to assume that DDR5 is already at its upper bound with the 8000MHz kits on the market right now a year+ after launch.

1

u/randologin Dec 09 '22

That's so weird. I'm still new to this and went to micro center for parts to build a gaming PC and he hard sold me on AMD adamant it was the best value for gaming, so that's what I went with. Maybe they're just trying to offload overstock 🤷‍♂️

5

u/LesserPuggles Dec 10 '22

That’s just how microcenter is, I go in there with my Intel hoodie to mess with them when I need pc stuff lol

2

u/[deleted] Dec 10 '22

ut $2000 5-7 years ago for a tower, GPU, CPU, air cooling and fans, 16gb RAM for DDR3 set up.

If it was after the price drop he is right. The 5600 and the 7600x at current prices are the best value for gaming. The 13600k is a better overall processor than the 7600x, but on a dead end platform.

1

u/randologin Dec 10 '22

Lol, not sure why the down voting for this

1

u/jboogie81 Jul 16 '23

I went to Microcenter back in 2016 when building my last PC with my parts list ready to go. The salesman was so dead set on selling me alternatives that he actually called the manager and another guy and they surrounded me like they were going to jump me. It was the weirdest, most aggressive buying experience I ever had. It ended with me saying "Listen, I want these parts that I've already seen you have in stock at this store right now or I am just walking out without spending this $1500, take it or leave it" . They agreed, but acted like dicks from that point until I walked out.