In this article, we will compare the key features of the two systems and try to answer the age-old question, which of them is cooler.

What determines the processor performance?

To better understand how the processors of both companies differ, let's start with the basic concepts of performance. What exactly determines the power and what characteristics to look at when choosing?

Frequency

Everything is simple here: the higher the maximum frequency, the more performant the CPU (note: CPU). If you need performance in games and heavy applications, we advise you to focus on the 3.5 GHz boundary. This is the figure you will see in the minimum system requirements of new toys like Red Dead Redemption 2 and Outer World. Although, for games, the performance of the graphics card will still be more important. Usually Intel processors were ahead here, but now the situation is approximately equal.

Cores and Threads

Perhaps the most important parameter for today when choosing. For comfortable gameplay in 2019, you need at least a quad-core CPU. For simple tasks like surfing the web, two are enough. For complex calculations such as audio-video rendering, ideally 8 or more cores are needed. It is also worth remembering about multithreading — these are additional virtual cores that help out a lot in heavy tasks. Here the picture is better with AMD, which adds multithreading even to inexpensive processors of the caliber of AMD Ryzen 5 Summit Ridge 1400 BOX .

Technical process and architecture

If you simplify it, then you can stick to a simple rule, the newer the better. For example, the once top Intel Core i7 Haswell i7-4770K Price from 2 500 up to 5 486 ₴ the fourth generation now shows almost the same performance as the low-cost Intel Core i3 Coffee Lake i3-8100 BOX of the eighth generation.

Intel has the most up-to-date Coffee Lake Refresh line at the moment. As you can guess from the name, this is essentially a cosmetic update of the previous Coffe Lake series, only with slightly increased clock speeds and more favorable prices. You can see an overview of the most interesting processors in this series in the article "Coffee Lake Refresh Revision: which Intel processor to choose in 2019". AMD recently debuted a completely new Zen 2 architecture (read about it in the article "Comparison of AMD X470 and X570 chipsets what 's new ?»), on the basis of which the company managed to introduce the first mass processors with 12 and 16 cores — AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3900X BOX Price from 27 200 up to 28 854 ₴ and AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3950X BOX Price from 25 975 up to 32 655 ₴. However, the previous generation Ryzen still set the heat and work on simpler and cheaper motherboards.

The Key difference between AMD and Intel

Over the past 10 years, AMD has been labeled "cheap and angry," while Intel has been associated with high quality and performance. After the release of breakthrough Ryzen processors, the situation changed: AMD ceased to be associated with cheapness and poor performance, and Intel received a magic pendel that forced it to look for new strategies and lower prices.

In 2019, the boundaries have blurred, but with a cursory inspection, one key difference can still be noticed. Usually, Intel relies on higher standard frequencies, AMD attracts potential buyers with the number of cores and multithreading. As sales show, those who want to vote in rubles for the second option are much more. From the report of the largest German online store MindFactory.de for October 2019, we can see that the Ryzen CPU is sold almost 4 times more than Intel — 78% vs. 22%. But this does not mean that AMD is cooler than Intel and you can diverge. Both companies have their own strengths and weaknesses, as well as hit models and frankly unsuccessful processors.

Comparison of performance in games

As the review and tests show, the differences between modern CPU models of competing firms are no longer so significant. Intel is still the king of gaming systems, but its dominance is not so significant. With top-end GTX 1080 Ti graphics cards, top-end Intel i7-8700K processors have higher performance in most modern games. In the future, the situation may change in favor of AMD processors with numerous threads due to improved multithreading support by new games.

When comparing the average FPS on Ultra graphics settings and FullHD resolution, Intel processors are on average 10% faster than their direct competitors from AMD. However, the size of the gap depends on the game itself. For example, in Shadow of the Tomb Raider Intel Core i9 Coffee Lake Refresh i9-9900K BOX outputs an average of 17 FPS more than AMD Ryzen 9 Matisse 3900X BOX Price from 27 200 up to 28 854 ₴ — 131 FPS vs. 114 FPS. And in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, on the contrary, the gap is reduced to a negligible 4 FPS. At the same time, the 9900K can be found on the market for almost $100 cheaper than the 3900X.

So is Intel still the king of gaming? Not quite. In terms of the "dollar to FPS" ratio (note: price to performance ratio), AMD CPUs are in the lead in most cases. Below you can see a comparison table that contains the average frames per second of 8 popular games of 2019, as well as how many dollars one FPS costs.


As you can see, there are only 3 Intel processors out of 11 models in the top. The remaining 8 are representatives of the "red" camp. Moreover, low-cost models like AMD Ryzen 5 Summit Ridge 1600 BOX 14 nm , and performant CPU caliber AMD Ryzen 7 Pinnacle Ridge 2700X BOX Price from 5 354 up to 7 552 ₴. In general, the unspoken rule "Intel is more expensive and faster in games" is confirmed again. But the gap is quite insignificant.

Comparison of performance in work

And that's where the fun begins. The fact is that Intel has been confidently leaving AMD behind for a long time both in games and in work applications. And if you looked into the working PC of a famous music producer, a seasoned video editor or an experienced graphics specialist, then with a 99% probability you would see a powerful Core i7 or Core i9 there. Intel chips have become synonymous with fast and reliable operation — Apple and other PC and laptop manufacturers use only them, and manufacturers of specialized software Steinberg, Adobe, Ableton, Output, or Waves optimize their software with Intel in mind.

In 2019, the situation has become much more complicated. Due to the larger number of cores and threads (at an equal price), processors like the Ryzen 3600X caliber have a larger power reserve than Intel CPUs of the same level. But due to the optimization of software for Intel, this difference is not always fully disclosed. For example, in tests for loading plugins into Reaper, identical chips from Intel bypass competitors from AMD by almost 30%.

In the table below you can see the overall results of the SYSmark 2018 synthetic test. They should be taken seriously because it is not conditional points that are considered here, but the performance of the system when performing various user scenarios such as working in Acrobat Pro, Photoshop, BowPad, Excel or PowerPoint. As you can see, the new processors with the Zen 2 microarchitecture noticeably tightened their results — if a year ago the eight-core Ryzen 7 2700X in SYSmark 2018 fell far short of modern Core i5 processors, the new six-core Ryzen 5 3600X and Ryzen 5 3600 confidently surpass the direct competitor in the face of the six-core Core i5 and almost overtake the more top-end Core i7-8700K, which costs $150 more.

What is even more interesting, this pattern is observed in any test simulating everyday work with content, rendering, complex calculations, etc. Apparently, this breakthrough happened due to the fact that AMD implemented a full-fledged execution of AVX2 instructions and a doubled L3 cache in Zen 2. If we compare with previous generations, the performance of the new AMD six-cores relative to the Ryzen 5 2600X increased by an average of 20% and reached the level of the eight-core Ryzen 7 1800X of the generation before last. Impressive result!

What else is the difference between Intel and AMD processors?

Overclocking

In general, AMD's piggy bank of advantages should also include the ability to overclock the processor and RAM even on low-cost boards. And a free multiplier, which greatly simplifies the overclocking process. Intel often dabbles with artificial restrictions, when only processors with the index "K" and only on motherboards with top-end chipsets of the "Z" series can be overclocked. However, the latest lines of both companies already have an exorbitant Turbo Boost and it's not so easy to squeeze something out of them. Especially when it comes to the "stones" of the upper and top level.

Socket Updates

Intel has one tricky feature that does not paint it. Namely, systematic socket updates every few years. The most relevant at the moment is the LGA 1151 v2 socket, but it has already run its 2 years and with a high probability with the release of the new generation of Comet Lake we will see an updated socket. All this greatly complicates the upgrade process, if after 3-4 years you want to change the processor to a more modern one, then most likely you will have to spend money on a new motherboard. And this is actually the floor of the computer.

In contrast, AMD is updated when it really needs to and still uses the AM4 platform introduced in 2016. Considering that the new top 12 and 16-core Ryzen processors run on the same socket, the end user remains a big winner. Of course, it will not work to put such a monster on a low-cost motherboard three years ago, but the available room for manoeuvre cannot but please.

Built-in graphics

There are cases when you need to do without a video card in the system or "sit out" on the built-in graphics before buying a discrete one. This option is quite real, especially if you are not an avid gamer. Intel processors, with the exception of top models, have an integrated Intel UHD Graphics video core. Its performance is not as good as that of competitors, but it is quite enough for 4K image output, hardware video decoding, browsing and undemanding tasks.

At the same time, AMD processors with integrated Vega graphics set a high bar: they do a good job with not too voracious multiplayer games like Dota 2, World of Tanks, CS:GO and Fortnite, giving them 50 – 60 FPS in FullHD resolution and average graphics settings. What's even cooler, Vega 8 became the first integrated graphics card that pulls GTA 5 and the Witcher 3 on minimalks. In general, the performance here is almost at the level of GT 1030 and far ahead of integrated graphics in Intel processors.

Conclusion

From all that has been said, it may seem that AMD is better than Intel in everything (integrated graphics, number of cores + multithreading, price), but in fact this is a dispute from the rap vs. rock category and a lot rests on personal preferences. For example, the built-in graphics is more useful for a low-cost or office PC, where there is no discrete graphics card. If you have it, then it doesn't make much sense to overpay for Vega or Intel UHD. Multithreading drags in heavy applications, but in games it practically does not affect FPS.

Therefore, everything depends on the price. And you know what? The situation here is also ambiguous. It used to be like this: Intel is expensive and powerful, AMD is cheap and angry. But Ryzen chips have changed everything, AMD is no longer dumping as desperate, and Intel is decently lowering prices under the yoke of competition. Especially for inexpensive processors. Therefore, Core i3 and Core i5 of the latest generation for the most part feel great in the initial and middle price segment. For example, the new Core i3-9100F looks almost the most interesting option up to $ 100.

But the top Core i7 and Core i9 in terms of price and performance are now losing out to the new Ryzen Matisse. The Core i9 is especially hard: at the end of 2019, AMD will release the first 16-core Ryzen 3950X processor, which will break in heavy applications. And all this at a price of $750. There will be nothing left to justify the draconian prices for Intel's top multi-cores.

Also, when choosing, it is important to look not only at the price of the processor, but also at the cost of the entire platform in the assembly: processor + motherboard + RAM. And if the spread is not so strong in the low-cost segment, then for top processors, the skew in prices does not benefit Intel.

Considering all of the above, for inexpensive builds we would start from personal preferences, for powerful gaming PCs we would take something like Intel Core i7 Coffee Lake Refresh i7-9700K BOX , and for performant workstations would look away AMD Ryzen 7 Matisse 3800X BOX Price from 11 399 up to 11 838 ₴ and above.