It Depends on your budget and need. If you are going to build gaming Pc with good budget get Core i5 or i7 , for Medium budget get AMD fx 8320 or Fx 4100 , for Low end budget gaming get A10-5800k (great Integrated Graphics). if you Are planning home Pc for surfing and watching movies get AMD APU A4-5300 or Athlon x2 270. AMDs Processors with too many cores such as Fx-8320 or Recent 8 core 5Ghz can be used for heavy Multitasking. i7>i5>Fx-8350>A10>Fx-4100>i3
as AMD is very cheap, it offers great value for money. I personally recommend AMD, but if you have decent budget go for i5 or i7.
Overall Intel has the best values. I would both professionally and personally use Intel processoring units over AMD. Intel has a really advanced Turbo boost technology. It has Hyper threading. Clock boosting. Cooling advantages. Crystal differentials that makes the cpu cooler compared to the clock speed.
There is no better overall. There is only better for specific situations.
Intel is more efficient, has a wider range of offerings, has much better higher end stuff and typically fares better in gaming.
AMD has a wider range of processors which have better integrated graphics, and their products have a focus on cost effectiveness. If you are on a budget, go with AMD. If not, intel will do better.
Overall, Intel has the better Processors. Their technology is more advanced, and their cores based on single-core performance are more superior. However, it also depends on what you want to do. Some AMD APUs are quite good and beat out Intel in some respects. AMD is better value though, more bang for your buck.
Frankly I'm sick of this question. In terms of price to performance AMD>Intel. And in terms of just performance Intel is better. Suppose if you are gaming and you buy an Intel and an AMD in the same price range. The Intel will outperform the AMD. But in terms of raw performance the AMD will be better. For more info
I have to add something that most people are neglecting.
AMD has a better price to performance ratio than Intel, but Intel has better performance. That's true. But that's only true if you only consider the initial purchase price.
If you pay for your own electricity and you intend to keep the computer for as long as it still runs, then Intel's lower power consumption will make it cost less to own than the AMD processor -- by quite a bit, actually.
Start with desktops. Let's compare an Intel Ivy Bridge system with an AMD piledriver system. Processors alone, Intel's peak power consumption maxes out around 77W, and AMD's maxes out at 125W. That leaves a difference of 48W. Now let's consider a "low" energy bill of 7 cents per kw-hr. Over the lifetime of the processors continuously running (let's give them both Intel's parts guarantee of 7 years, or 61362 hours), that's a difference of 2945 kw-hrs, or $206 with that low energy bill. A more reasonable energy bill might be 10c/kw-hr, which gives a difference of $294.50 over the lifetime of the processor. So unless for equivalent performance you're paying $200 more for the Intel processor, it will cost more to own the AMD processor over its lifetime -- oh, and AMD's processor lifetime isn't as good as Intel's, so you'd have to replace it sooner anyway.
If you compare an Intel Haswell system to an AMD system at average power (not peak power, but average power) running Windows 8, then it looks tremendously worse for the AMD processor.
Depends on what sector you're in. For price-performance, AMD is so much better. However, Intel is better with their architecture and their power intake. So ya, like i said, it depends.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
It Depends on your budget and need. If you are going to build gaming Pc with good budget get Core i5 or i7 , for Medium budget get AMD fx 8320 or Fx 4100 , for Low end budget gaming get A10-5800k (great Integrated Graphics). if you Are planning home Pc for surfing and watching movies get AMD APU A4-5300 or Athlon x2 270. AMDs Processors with too many cores such as Fx-8320 or Recent 8 core 5Ghz can be used for heavy Multitasking. i7>i5>Fx-8350>A10>Fx-4100>i3
as AMD is very cheap, it offers great value for money. I personally recommend AMD, but if you have decent budget go for i5 or i7.
Overall Intel has the best values. I would both professionally and personally use Intel processoring units over AMD. Intel has a really advanced Turbo boost technology. It has Hyper threading. Clock boosting. Cooling advantages. Crystal differentials that makes the cpu cooler compared to the clock speed.
There is no better overall. There is only better for specific situations.
Intel is more efficient, has a wider range of offerings, has much better higher end stuff and typically fares better in gaming.
AMD has a wider range of processors which have better integrated graphics, and their products have a focus on cost effectiveness. If you are on a budget, go with AMD. If not, intel will do better.
Overall, Intel has the better Processors. Their technology is more advanced, and their cores based on single-core performance are more superior. However, it also depends on what you want to do. Some AMD APUs are quite good and beat out Intel in some respects. AMD is better value though, more bang for your buck.
Frankly I'm sick of this question. In terms of price to performance AMD>Intel. And in terms of just performance Intel is better. Suppose if you are gaming and you buy an Intel and an AMD in the same price range. The Intel will outperform the AMD. But in terms of raw performance the AMD will be better. For more info
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICVeN6WEGgg&featur...
I have to add something that most people are neglecting.
AMD has a better price to performance ratio than Intel, but Intel has better performance. That's true. But that's only true if you only consider the initial purchase price.
If you pay for your own electricity and you intend to keep the computer for as long as it still runs, then Intel's lower power consumption will make it cost less to own than the AMD processor -- by quite a bit, actually.
Start with desktops. Let's compare an Intel Ivy Bridge system with an AMD piledriver system. Processors alone, Intel's peak power consumption maxes out around 77W, and AMD's maxes out at 125W. That leaves a difference of 48W. Now let's consider a "low" energy bill of 7 cents per kw-hr. Over the lifetime of the processors continuously running (let's give them both Intel's parts guarantee of 7 years, or 61362 hours), that's a difference of 2945 kw-hrs, or $206 with that low energy bill. A more reasonable energy bill might be 10c/kw-hr, which gives a difference of $294.50 over the lifetime of the processor. So unless for equivalent performance you're paying $200 more for the Intel processor, it will cost more to own the AMD processor over its lifetime -- oh, and AMD's processor lifetime isn't as good as Intel's, so you'd have to replace it sooner anyway.
If you compare an Intel Haswell system to an AMD system at average power (not peak power, but average power) running Windows 8, then it looks tremendously worse for the AMD processor.
Intel is definitely the way to go for processors, they have more experience in building and improving their designs than AMD.
Depends on what sector you're in. For price-performance, AMD is so much better. However, Intel is better with their architecture and their power intake. So ya, like i said, it depends.
When are people going to stop asking this question!
It all boils down to personal preference.
Intel = faster more powerful CPUs, higher price, for those who want the best
AMD = more bang for buck - cheaper, good upgrade path, makes CPUs and APUs, generally enough for most people
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Desktop-CPUs-for-under-300...
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Desktop-CPUs-best-Single-T...