Why Intel processor are adviced than AMD for gaming?

[cool.dx.rip]

In many threads,ppl are advised to use Intel processor for gaming or high intensive work instead of AMD processor.I would like have your answer with explanation Thanks

 

[Homeles]

In many threads,ppl are advised to use Intel processor for gaming or high intensive work instead of AMD processor.I would like have your answer with explanation Thanks

This is why, partly:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/697?vs=1261

Unfortunately, a lot of apps aren't multithreaded, and even many of the ones that are end up running better on Intel's offerings.

 

[exar333]

Intel = fast
AMD = slow

A 4-year old 2500K is still better than anything AMD has released since then for gaming.

 

[monstercameron]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

 

[SViscusi]

They're faster?

It's not really complicated, Intel right now is producing excellent chips and have a competitive piece at nearly every price point. There are circumstances where AMD is a good option like with their APU's or pre Pentium K budget gamer market but even where AMD is strong, Intel offers a reasonable alternative solution.

Plus you're at a forum where performance is pretty highly valued. The i5 k flavor of year will be the best choice in most people's eyes because it's been a damn fine line that offers decent extra value at a reasonable cost.

 

[Homeles]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

It's AMD's fault that they did not build designs that were optimized for today's workloads, not the other way around. There's also no guarantee that the situation will change on the software front, and even if it does, it will take years.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why Intel? Faster, more efficient, better performance/$ ratio and so on.

 

[BSim500]

The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

People have been saying that since 2005, and it's taken 9 years just to make an i5 more than 25% faster vs a same clocked i3 in more than 2-3 games, and even on next gen games (limited to 6x weak cores on consoles), threading still scales nowhere near 100% beyond the first 4 cores. People can demand "MT optimization" all they like, in the real world a lot of gaming code just isn't naturally heavily threadable the way it is with easily predictable identically structured video encoding blocks / Cinebench benchmarks, etc. It isn't deliberately "biased" against AMD at all, AMD are just pursuing the cheap route of piling on "MOAR CORES" to try and compensate for weak IPC vs spending more money coming up with a much better design as Intel did with P4 vs Core. IPC (core efficiency) is still king for gaming. And even at same performance, a 50-70% performance per watt advantage for Intel (55-84w vs AMD's 95-220w) isn't exactly the world's best advert for AMD "efficiency" either.

 

[escrow4]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

AMD obviously has a clue of the "system" and workloads plus what makes Intel excel and it initially came up with Bulldozer. Its brand new competitor was a failure even with foreknowledge. What bias? Its a rubbish design. And piledriver, what next? You are stuck with an ageing CPU on an obsolete platform while Intel is busy loading up Broadwell and Skylake. And Intel has absolutely kicked AMD in the balls with the Anniversary Pentium - why buy anything low end Athlon quad core even?

 

[jana519]

I think an AMD processor is adequate for gaming, it just consumes more power. It's a matter of what you are looking for personally, not the name.

 

[dragantoe]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

this is all that needs to be said about intel vs amd when it comes to gaming

 

[Phynaz]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

What system do you speak of? Are all the game devs in bed with Intel, so to speak?

 

[aigomorla]

this thread is not going to end well I predict...

There is no way to defend intel without being called a fanboy.
There is no way to defend AMD without being called a dreamer / idealist / fanboy.

So im gonna with with ARM design as being the most superior of them all!

 

[frozentundra123456]

I think he was being sarcastic, but not really sure. I also predict this thread will not end well. Seems like a bit of research by the OP would have given the obvious answers. In any case, to the OP, just go to game.gpu and look at the graphs, the answer becomes obvious. AMD is at best competitive in a very few games optimized for more cores, and loses badly in others, while using more power. The only advantage is a lower initial cost which is pretty much eaten up over a few years lifetime of a system by the increased power usage.

 

[dragantoe]

this thread is not going to end well I predict...

There is no way to defend intel without being called a fanboy.
There is no way to defend AMD without being called a dreamer / idealist / fanboy.

So im gonna with with ARM design as being the most superior of them all!

meh, the ipc just isn't there yet...

 

[DominionSeraph]

 

[Durp]

Most games cannot properly use more than a few processor cores. Because of this, you want the cores that the game CAN use to be fast. Intel has had an IPC lead over AMD for the last four generations while still having a similar maximum clock speed.

Some games can use many cores but since Amd's cores are so far behind Intel's cores in IPC, the end result usually still leaves the AMD processor behind or only keeping up.

So when someone asks for a recommendation for a computer that is going to be used as a gaming box then you recommend Intel so they can enjoy good gaming performance in all games instead of a few.

 

[Deders]

Actually would be interested to know if AMD's user experience is like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26UKz42uQ1Y

or more like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8Sekdb-IE

 

[Arachnotronic]

this thread is not going to end well I predict...

There is no way to defend intel without being called a fanboy.
There is no way to defend AMD without being called a dreamer / idealist / fanboy.

So im gonna with with ARM design as being the most superior of them all!

No, MIPS!

 

[Grooveriding]

Please don't open this can of worms!
The system is biased against AMD designs. When games bet more MT optimized then we'll see the vision AMD tried to give to its customers.

#MOARCOARS

Well Intel has plenty of high core options available to the desktop for when that happens. If we suddenly saw the majority of games coming out multithreaded heavily and AMD winning benchmarks, I'm sure Intel could react if they wanted to.

They'd already have the faster parts in their hex and octo desktop chips, they'd only have to adjust pricing.

 

[Denithor]

Lawnchair + popcorn

This is almost as entertaining as the fireworks on the 4th.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I'm quite happy with my FX. But Intel makes a more balanced CPU.

 

[PPB]

Because you can still get good performance on your everyday crappily coded game that only uses 2 cores, and run video encoding/rendering with the other 6

Or run AAA games where they difference between aged FX and Intel's offerings is becoming less and less aparent as they are actually making games that scale beyond 4 threads.

 

[Pheesh]

People recommending Intel or AMD are both wrong, the ti-86 and other graphing calculators currently house the most powerful processors and have for years.

 

[Roland00Address]

Because quite simply the Intel Processors are better than the AMD processors.

Now some people would like to argue this and it is up for debate. But intel's architecture and intel's technology advantage are just simply put better than AMD architecture and AMD inherent process technology.

-----

Now you can argue that AMD provides a better cpu at a certain price point. Sure an i7 4790k is better than every amd chip, but most people are not spending $340 dollars, and AMD provides a better chip for $50, $75, $130, $200, etc

Instead these people will argue you should get the $200 AMD 8 core, and spend the extra $140 on a better gpu. Problem with that argument is that the $200 intel core i5 is a better gaming chip than the $200 AMD 8 core. The AMD 8 core may win in some other tasks such as cinebench but in games the intel is once again better.

Now you can do similar arguments at lower price points but in the end it all boils down to similar X vs Y. Sure the difference between AMD $75 dollar chip vs Intel $75 dollar chip is closer than the AMD $200 chip vs the Intel $200 chip but in the end AMD does not have a clear gaming winner over intel at any of the current price points.

-----

This has not always been the case. In the past AMD has shown some clear values over intel at certain price points.