I have always been an Intel user and can't complain about my Intel CPU's, but I have never fully understood the difference between Intel and AMD processors. Are Intel chips really faster and more consistent than AMD chips? What differentiates the chips so much?What are the pros and cons to each? Thanks in advance for your opinions.


I was in the same situation and under the same impression. I however have just switched to AMD and got the FX-8350, mobo- 990FXA-UD5 Gigabyte, 2x 4GB DDR3 at 2210 MHz, though my video card is a crappy Zotac GTX 560 Ti (dont like how it only has 1GB RAM).

I'm happy with my switch from my similar i7-3930k build. Very happy, though I would not suggest going with the CPU cooler AMD provides, its loud :P

I think its definitely on par with Intel just cheaper and requires a little more tweaking, though its very customize friendly for people who like to fine tune their settings I guess. Im still learning though. Will be investing in an AMD videocard when I have the money. I'll be moving to michigan soon though, so saving all my money for that.


As for the pro's and cons, it depends on what you're using your pc for. If you get an AMD quad core, you will be able to handle any game out there paired with a proper gpu of course. Intel high end processors are more for heavy multi-tasking, video editing, etc. 


I have a AMD Phenom Black II and recently was gifted a  MOBO but its a 1155 slot so I most likely will be switching to Intel. Im not sure what changes lay in store...


generally you wont notice too much of a difference when pair with a good GPU. Really is and probably will always be, that AMD is for a budget build, intel isnt.

but if you want to compare any 2 CPUs (amd vs intel)


in the left side, pick each CPU and you will see the scored compared. In most cases... intel will beat AMD.



Rule of thumb, If your building a mostly gaming rig and you have a budget of $1000 or less, go AMD.  That being said, clock cycle for clock cycle, Intel CPU's generally are faster than AMD, that's why they cost more.   


I was just reading an interesting post on Reddit that answers a general question about clock speeds but evolves into a much more in depth conversation about what makes a processor better and for what purposes. There were several comments revolving around the differences between the two manufacturers.  Pretty informative stuff and definitely not just "ELI5"...


See as someone that has been building computers since the 486.66 DX2 days. It is all in what you want to do and what your budget is. I have had better luck with AMD over Intel for longevity and had people that say the same for Intel. When it comes down to it find something that will do what you want it to do and plan for it to do for atleast 3 to 5 years. That is how I put together computers for people.


Neither one is better than the other. People constantly say there is a better choice and that is just their opinion. That's exactly what it boils down to: Which one do you prefer? If you are used to intel and you are happy with their processors stick with them. If you want to try something different go with AMD. That's the beauty of building your own PC, you have full control on what goes into it.


Its mostly about preference. Although Intel CPU's are more advanced than AMD (also more costly). Intel's Haswell chip has a 22 nano-meter architecture(smaller chip better power efficiency). While AMD's FX-series chips have a 32nm architecture. Having almost double the TDP of Haswell. Example: FX9590's tdp is 220w, the I-7 5960x's max tdp is 140w. Granted, the 9590 has a much higher base clock speed.

I've been an Intel person for years, but as of recent I can see that AMD offers better value for your money. Certainly Intel has lower tdp. AMD's 8 core 9590 sells Approx for $ 250, where intel's is a cool $1,000. So...if you're rich buy intel, if on a budget go AMD.
I'd have to say I'm more of the opposite as I've used AMD pretty much exclusively since I started building computers years ago when I was in school. All of my builds have been AMD pretty much because it's so much cheaper to build a system on a tight budget that's still poweful enough to play all the latest games.

Currently, I've decided to switch from AMD for an intel system when I've saved up enough money simply because while FM2+ and AM3+ systems (depending on budget) are both extremely nice, those platforms are starting to get a bit old now and haven't really had the same kinds of upgrades and extra features as intel has lately. I'm also dissapointed that I can't upgrade to a 9590 on my board since it's a first revision Crosshair V from Asus and some of the extra software tools still aren't there for Windows 8 (or not supported with the the Original board I have).

Really it has almost become a none issue, CPU's are over powered for most consumer applications now. I think any quad core cpu built within the last 3 years will work for most applications. There are some users that will require a cpu that has a little more horsepower, but they know who they are and can usually figure out which to go with, AMD or Intel.
its games... thats it. Any normal app (Excel, Word, Chrome, etc) will work fine with any CPU from the last 5 years lol... Games (and Video/Image) editing is where the big power is needed.
Ive always been told that Intel had the best for gaming/video editing and AMD more on the business side and gaming which i could be wrong but i would go Intel all the way 🙂
Users browsing this topic