AMD vs. INTEL?

[ciscii]

Hello Peepz!
- So for a long time, i've been struggling to figure, which is better?
AMD Processor Vs. Intel Processor?
AMD R9's vs. Nvidia GTX 7xx Series?
Intel. Vs. AMD Motherboard?
- Whenever I surf on the internet, I get so many mixed feelings, about whether to take one or the other.
Intel mostly get positive feedback, despite their pricings.
However, I see a lot where people say you get the same, but cheaper, from AMD, however their products lag quality,
and is easily either ineffective (short usage before crash/very short "living" time) or got lagging support.

As i'm about to build my own setup, my final choice will probably be based on this forums arguments (Pro's & Con's). Hope you'll help me!

As for my thoughts about configuration (AMD. Vs Intel products), I've thought about the following;

AMD: R9 290x, AMD FX-8350 X8 4.00 GHz 16 MB, Asus SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0 AM3+ 990FX.

Vs.

Intel: i5 4670K 3.4GHz 6MB HD4600 OC, Asus Z87-K ATX USB3 SATA6 DVI/VGA/HDMI (Could be upgraded), EVGA GTX780 FTW 3072MB

- Thanks in advance! =)

[jimbouk]

R9 290X and an i5? Or GTX780 and the FX-8350?

Look at the CPU and motherboard together in terms of features/performance/bang-for-buck, then look at the GPU. No need to match AMD CPUs and GPUs generally, nor to match Intel with Nvidia.

Budget and what you are going to use it for are the main considerations. From the suggestions it would seem that your budget is pretty large which would push me to suggest Intel for the CPU.

[kalniel]

And regarding quality they are both equally very high quality, you should have no concerns there. Both also offer excellent support to business customers, though if you are building your own system then you will be responsible for the support, not them.

[GeorgeStorm]

Budget is a major factor.

If you want the best performance you can get then intel hold that crown, but I would personally say for most tasks an AMD cpu will handle it no problem (gaming and the like shows very little difference).

GPU again comes down to budget, as jimbouk said, you don't need to pair up companies.

What res will you be gaming at, what's the rest of your spec?
I'd be tempted to lower the budget for the box and spend money on peripherals (mouse, keyboard, speakers, headphones, monitors etc) as they can make a far larger difference to your experience.

[Dooms]

As Kalniel said both offer good products these days. I just go for whats best bang for buck at the time of my wanted upgrade.

I was running an i5 760 & nVidia 460 for years as when I purchased that machine it was by far the best choice out there. My recent upgrade had me move over to a FX8350 as its a damn good CPU for a much lower price than the equivalent i7 and newer games are starting to make use of those extra cores.

GPU wise I would currently go for a non-reference 290 (non-X) as it seems the best for the price point.

My work mate on the other hand will NEVER move away from Intel and nVidia, cost / performance be damned.

[mikeo01]

Budget wise both can offer similar performance.

Intel dominate single threaded performance and excel at most games when paired with a discrete card.
AMD on the other hand are pretty darn good at multi-threading in particular, the FX-8320 is a bargain at the moment. The difference is not that much, especially when paired with a good discrete card.

Gaming wise, as mentioned, what resolution? R9 290X/GTX 780 are very expensive and hungry cards. If you'll be playing at the usual 1080P (1920x1080) then go for something smaller, because it's a waste otherwise (R9 280X/R9 270X, GTX760/GTX770 be fine at that resolution).


Really, you want to mention what else you'll do with the computer. That'll answer what CPU you need


Though I am personally biased for AMD (I try not to be!) even though I own an Intel machine

[KeyboardDemon]

I have two PCs, my main rig (because my nephew prefers to the other one) is using an Intel CPU, i7 3770K + GTX780Ti my other rig has an FX8350 + R9 290X.

If you blind tested me by loading up a game on either one and getting me to play it I think I would not be able to tell the difference between them, if I benchmark them there are obvious differences, but while benchmarks are good for my ego (sometimes, depending on results lol) and for the bragging factor, in real terms of usage I often find it hard to tell them differences between. The slightly faster load time on my Intel rig (down to the faster SSD) is not really that noticeable and I would get the same difference if I upgraded the SSD on the AMD rig and maybe reinstalled Windows.

[Ttaskmaster]

I love AMD...
My blood runs red and true.
Don't care for Intel products,
I don't look good in blue!

AMD - It's harder, faster, better,
AMD - And it's cheaper.
AMD - That kit can overclock.
AMD - Intel is a **** block!

AMD - 60% of the time,
My Athalon is faster every time.
AMD - Save yourself some money,
AMD - By switching to AMD!!


I run an AMD 6350 partnered with an XFX 6950 and can play anything in 1080p just fine.
I might upgrade in the future, particularly the GPU, but in the real world I already have a fairly high end rig and would likely not notice much difference at all with a better rig.

This might be a useful perspective on things:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ck,3106-5.html

[peterb]

Hello Peepz!
- So for a long time, i've been struggling to figure, which is better?
AMD Processor Vs. Intel Processor?
R9's vs. GTX 7xx Series?
Intel. Vs. AMD Motherboard?

It depends what you mean by "better". If any one was best, the other manufacturers would be out of business because no-one would buy a worse product.

So what are your criteria? In terms of "bang for buck" AMD generally offer better value for money. However there are other factors - such as the motherboard. Intel based motherboards tend to be slightly more expensive, but offer different facilities. The same applies to GPUs.

If you are on a budget, you will 'probably' get more for your money from AMD.

Some software may specify Intel processors if it has been optimised for that particular instruction set or architecture, but that is a pretty rare occurrence - and if that is thecae, you have no choice. For general use, look at what you need in system terms/specification - including budget if appropriate - and select the components appropriately

[KeyboardDemon]

I'm an AMD, ATI, Intel and nVidia fan boy. Yeah for those Reds, Blues and Greens. Got to love them, they're the best.

[ciscii]

Hey guys. After some consideration (Answers from here and other forums), I've come to the conclusion of going with something like this.
ASUS Z87-PRO, Socket-1150
be quiet! Pure Power L8 CM - 730W
Be quiet! Shadow rock 2
Intel Core i7-4770K
Corsair DDR3 PC2133 16GB kit CL10 VENGEANCE 1.5v
Fractal Design Define R4 Windowed
ASUS GeForce GTX 770 OC - 4GB GDDR5
Samsung 840 EVO SSD - 250GB
BENQ XL2411T 24"

- What you think? =)

[KeyboardDemon]

I'm so jealous.

That'll be an awesome rig.

Enjoy it.

[MrRockliffe]

I'd go 4670k, 550w modular PSU (seasonic or corsair cs550), and then spend more on peripherals. Wish I had done that.

[ciscii]

In the beginning, I was going for i5 4670k + GTX 780 aswell, however I figured in the long run, how games actually start using the hyper threading aswell, I might aswell go with the i7, as the GTX 770 is more than enough for me. Then it might be a little more "future proof" aswell ;-)

- As for power supply, I think a 550 might be a little to low, as I want to have to possibility to upgrade my system later on. Maybe with SLI. Who knows. And as I was going with a silent High-performance & "future proof" build, I think that would be the right one for me. (Unless I can find something very similair - the "Be quiet" components is quite hard to find, without long delivery time >.<)

[kalniel]

- As for power supply, I think a 550 might be a little to low, as I want to have to possibility to upgrade my system later on. Maybe with SLI.

550W is overkill for the current system, but would be fine if you were planning to upgrade later.

[MrRockliffe]

550W is overkill for the current system, but would be fine if you were planning to upgrade later.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it's overkill, but it's certainly plentiful for that system, and it'll allow him to overclock as far as he wants (or can) without worrying about power. And as you stated, it'd give him room for upgrading in the future. If you plan on SLI a card, I'd recommend 3GB of memory to ensure there's no memory bottle neck - by the time you need to SLI a 770 textures will take up a lot of memory.