In the heart of your search for a new computer is the most important decision you can make: why you Should choose a device with the processor AMD or Intel? Like Apple vs. Microsoft, or Fortnite vs. Apex Legends, the choice between AMD vs. Intel is one of the great debates for PC users. One of these two providers will be the beating heart of your new computer, and it is certain that AMD and Intel are so different from each other as the products that they develop. That said, we take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of both processors, so let us go deeper into the details to discover what would be the best option for your new PC.
Given that cost is an important factor in the construction, upgrading or buying a new computer, choose the CPU correct often is reduced to find the one that represents the best investment. Only for the price, the chips of AMD are usually cheaper than Intel chips comparable.
The dual-core processors AMD Sempron, Athlon or A-series dual-core start at about $30 dollars, and in comparison, a chip Intel low-end will cost around $40. However, these processors do not make very good updates, as they are on the cheap end. In fact, we recommend something like the Ryzen 3 2200G $100 dollars for a chip-level input. That said, you’ll find similar prices as you rise in the scale of performance, and the offerings of Intel are almost always a bit higher than the AMD.
During the greater part of a decade, this was the typical scenario of prices supported by the majority of the enthusiasts of the PC until the arrival of the new CPUs Ryzen AMD. Its debut in early 2017 shook that formula of long standing, with the Ryzen 7 1800X in the top of the spectrum of AMD focused on the consumer at that time. Today, the 2700X second generation is the king of that line, with eight cores, 16 threads and a price tag of around $300 dollars. The chip consumption current top of the Intel, the 9900K, comes with eight cores and 16 threads of their own, but its price is much higher, at $530 dollars. For more options of intermediate terrain, our Intel chips are recommended, which include the Core i5-8400 for $205 dollars and the Core i7-9700K for $410 dollars.
Meanwhile, the CPU Intel Core i9 and the AMD Threadripper aimed at enthusiasts more serious offer even more performance, multithreaded, and continue to expand the type of count of cores and threads that any average person can enjoy in a home system. The CPUs i9 seventh-and ninth-generation Intel offer between 10 and 18 cores and, thanks to hyperthreading, up to 36 threads. However, the prices can be very high, as the flagship 9980XE costs up to $2,000 dollars.
The chips of AMD, on the other hand, provide counts of nuclei larger, points of lowest prices and specifications more uniform throughout the range. The CPU Threadripper of the first generation have been discounted a lot lately, with some of the options of eight and 12 cores that cost a few hundred dollars. However, the new generation of CPUs Threadripper 2000 series offers between 12 and 32 cores and up to 64 threads with multithreaded simultaneous. They are also more expensive choices, ranging between $650 and $1,800. We recommend the Threadripper 2950x for $800 dollars if you want one of these updates high-end for a PC configuration of the first line.
All the chips Threadripper are compatible with 64-lane PCI Express, which is a big advantage over the maximum 44 of the range of Intel. However, they consume more energy thanks to all these additional cores.
All of this means that the competition in the high end market of CPU of desktop is more hot than ever, with many options for consumers in all budget lines.
VALUE IN LAPTOP COMPUTERS
The handheld market is a different story. Most of what you’ll find is based on Intel processors of several generations and integrated graphics. As noted by a representative of Dell at the beginning of this year, the portfolio of Intel is simply huge in comparison with AMD: the gap between the two companies is substantial in terms of market share and use cases.
We can’t know with certainty, but the problem could be that AMD spent many years focusing on chips all-in-one energy-consuming. Processors desktop AMD generally do not include integrated graphics, therefore, the Accelerated Processing Unit (APU, for its acronym in English) is designed for crams mobile, CPU cores and GPU on a single chip that consumes very little energy. Usually, it is associated with portable computers, low-end with the promise of a long battery life, as the series To 7th generation, which consumes approximately 15 watts of power. The last chips all-in-one brand Ryzen AMD consume the same 15 watts.
Meanwhile, the portfolio of Intel puts in first place the processing power of the CPU and the graphics, regardless of the form factor. Technically, you could say that also, are the chips all-in-one, but the CPU cores are at the heart of the package Intel. Of course, the i7-8550U of four nuclei absorbs a bit more energy than the quad-core chip all-in-one Ryzen 7 2700U AMD, but you get higher speeds base and momentum with the model Intel.
The argument of AMD is the performance-per-watt, and we understand that. But manufacturers of laptops apparently do not allow themselves to cheat, and prefer the portfolio of Intel, even more when they build laptops with discrete graphics. Don’t get me wrong: of course there are laptops with AMD chips all-in-one on the market, but they are not as plentiful as the variants based on Intel.
But times could be changing for AMD. Acer recently introduced a laptop for games that is based on the hardware of AMD, but it is not a chip all-in-one. In contrast, the Predator Helios 500 offers up to an AMD processor Ryzen 7 2700 of eight cores and a discrete graphics chip Radeon RX Vega 56 along with the compilation options for Intel / Nvidia more common.
In general, both companies are producing processors that are within striking distance in nearly all fronts: price, power and performance. The Intel chips tend to offer a better performance per core, but AMD is compensating with more cores at a given price.
Recommendations of the editor