4 ms·
> Are the recent AMD CPUs generally better for their price than Intel ones, and are there any downsides? My personal context is compiling programs, Oh boy, ar
by chx 7y ago
> Are the recent AMD CPUs generally better for their price than Intel ones, and are there any downsides? My personal context is compiling programs,
Oh boy, are you in for a nice surprise. https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ryzen-3700x-3900x-linux&num=7 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ryzen-37... the Ryzen 7 3700X (323 USD) stands its ground against the i9 9900K (485 USD). The top end is not even funny, there is no consumer Intel CPU that can stand against the Ryzen 9 3900X (499 USD), the LGA 2066 workstation chips that can are double, triple the price. Or, to put it another way: at the same price the 3900X vs 9900k it is 32% faster when compiling the kernel. Passmark https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-9-3900X-vs-Intel-Core-i9-9900K/3493vs3334 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-9-3900X-vs-In... shows no less than fifty percent. Right now the 3900X is in such a short supply it sells for 700-ish on eBay. This will resolve in a few months -- there's a 3950X scheduled for September with 16 cores instead of 12 cores, slightly lower base clock (3.8 vs 3.5) but slightly higher turbo clock (4.7 vs 4.6) tightening the screw on Intel. Of course, it'll have a "halo" price at 750 USD but will compete, again, with Intel workstation chips double the price (and much higher TDP as well). Intel is in deep... and they have nothing to counter with, Comet Lake-S is only scheduled for next year, this roadmap was posted just a few weeks ago: https://www.techpowerup.com/img/Gouh8r91rj9vR7FV.jpg https://www.techpowerup.com/img/Gouh8r91rj9vR7FV.jpg and these are just words, there is no guarantee whatsoever they will be able to ship 10nm in mass market quantity ever.
Ps. Intel's workstation (HEDT) strategy is a mess anyways -- https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i9-9900K-vs-Intel-i9-9820X-vs-Intel-i9-9900X/3334vs3369vs3376 https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i9-9900K-vs-Intel... they essentially have nothing to offer between 485 USD and 950 USD which of course right now hits them with a vengeance because they can't just take a 700 USD CPU, bring it down in price a bit and make it into a 3900X competitor. The LGA 2066 platform was nothing but a mess ever since launched, watch this video from 2017 highlighting the problems with LGA 2066: https://youtu.be/TWFzWRoVNnE https://youtu.be/TWFzWRoVNnE
- kreetx 7y agoThanks - and wow! I had heard that they are good, but not this good. Since price per performance is pretty much what I always look at then AMD looks like a clear winner. Some time ago I had just had a discussion on CPU choice with a friend and I think he went with Intel (citing something vague about "less problems"), and unfortunately I didn't look anything up then. It is sad in how little the general public knows about what is the best choice at any given moment and how long it takes for this knowledge to spread.
- belltaco 7y agoThe only downside is that Intel CPUs are better for gaming, especially if you pair with a high end GPU and high refresh rate monitors
- hencoappel 7y agoOnly slightly, like 5% between the 3900x and 9900k. And if you're not gaming with a 2080ti you're likely to not even notice the difference between a similarly priced Intel/AMD chips. If you do anything else other than gaming though the Ryzen chips blow Intel out of the water.
- kreetx 7y agoBut are they really better? I.e if the CPU can have any cost then maybe, but if looking at any performance level where both AMD and Intel are present, then AMD is always cheaper?
- chx 7y agoNot if you go 1440p+ where the GPU becomes the bottleneck.