3 ms·

If the application utilizes all the cores, then AMD is generally superior (performance/$)

hollerith 11y ago
are you including the price of electricity in your "$"? it usually costs more to power a CPU over its lifetime than it does to buy it, and Intel's been aggressively optimizing the Core architecture's performance per watt to prevent ARM from taking over on products where battery life is important.
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  I was curious so I actually measured it with a watt meter. AMD FX-8350 consumes ~39 watts at idle and ~180 at full load. Intel Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) consumes ~27 watts at idle and ~90 at full load. They both consume ~1 watt in standby. Also FWIW if you're holding onto an older chip because it's still "good enough" then you might want to think about upgrading to either of the above. Dual socket Intel Xeon 5160 uses 300 watts at the plug at idle.
  - hollerith 11y ago
    Thanks. Is this at the power rails on the motherboard or at the AC plug in the wall? ADDED. the "300 Watts" in your (added) second paragraph makes me strongly suspect that the measurements are from the wall socket / power cord. OK, so did you disconnect the power to any disk drives or graphics cards? Anything special about the power supply? (There are special, "green," extra-efficient power supplies.)
    - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
      This is at the plug using an AC watt meter. Incidentally FX-8350 has an internal watt meter that measures ~18 watts at idle and 125 at full load. I expect the power supply conversion losses you're after explain the difference between the two sets of numbers. Both hard drives were in standby mode (it reduces the power consumption by ~5 watts), though things like that should add the same amount to both systems and make no difference to the relative numbers. If anything I'm biasing against the AMD system because the i5 is using its internal GPU whereas the FX has a low end discrete GPU which I assume is adding five or ten watts to its numbers.
- witty_username 11y ago
  Depends on usage I guess, my CPU cost ($50) is ~4 months of the monthly electrical bill for the entire household. And I am doubtful the CPU even equals 5-10% of the electricity usage. EDIT: back of the envelope calculation Let's say my CPU runs 12 hours a day and uses 20 watts on average. So, over a month, it is used for 375 hours at 20 watts = 7.5 kwH which roughly costs about 1$.

are you including the price of electricity in your "$"? it usually costs more to power a CPU over its lifetime than it does to buy it, and Intel's been aggressively optimizing the Core architecture's performance per watt to prevent ARM from taking over on products where battery life is important.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago
I was curious so I actually measured it with a watt meter. AMD FX-8350 consumes ~39 watts at idle and ~180 at full load. Intel Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) consumes ~27 watts at idle and ~90 at full load. They both consume ~1 watt in standby. Also FWIW if you're holding onto an older chip because it's still "good enough" then you might want to think about upgrading to either of the above. Dual socket Intel Xeon 5160 uses 300 watts at the plug at idle.
- hollerith 11y ago
  Thanks. Is this at the power rails on the motherboard or at the AC plug in the wall? ADDED. the "300 Watts" in your (added) second paragraph makes me strongly suspect that the measurements are from the wall socket / power cord. OK, so did you disconnect the power to any disk drives or graphics cards? Anything special about the power supply? (There are special, "green," extra-efficient power supplies.)
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    This is at the plug using an AC watt meter. Incidentally FX-8350 has an internal watt meter that measures ~18 watts at idle and 125 at full load. I expect the power supply conversion losses you're after explain the difference between the two sets of numbers. Both hard drives were in standby mode (it reduces the power consumption by ~5 watts), though things like that should add the same amount to both systems and make no difference to the relative numbers. If anything I'm biasing against the AMD system because the i5 is using its internal GPU whereas the FX has a low end discrete GPU which I assume is adding five or ten watts to its numbers.
witty_username 11y ago
Depends on usage I guess, my CPU cost ($50) is ~4 months of the monthly electrical bill for the entire household. And I am doubtful the CPU even equals 5-10% of the electricity usage. EDIT: back of the envelope calculation Let's say my CPU runs 12 hours a day and uses 20 watts on average. So, over a month, it is used for 375 hours at 20 watts = 7.5 kwH which roughly costs about 1$.