The argument starts like this: Which is better - AMD or Intel? From there you can bet opinions differ strongly.
The real answer has changed over the years, depending on who you talk to and depending on what you want from your computer. It almost always comes down to which CPU offers the best performance for the kind of work you do, and how well the computer will stand up over the coming months.
Processors are certainly the most critical part of a computer, but they hardly work alone. It's nearly impossible to legitimately answer the AMD vs. Intel question without heavily considering the different platforms supporting each CPU, and by extension the features you get with one path and lose by not adopting its nemesis.
"Intel or AMD?"
Is a question we're asked all the time at PcHub, and a question that's echoed in computer stores from here to London, and fought on the battlegrounds of countless forums… Well, forget everything you've read before, We have the final, ultimate solution to the Big Green vs. Chipzilla battle royal! By the end of this article we're going to tell which CPU is better, and that knowledge may save you from buying into dead, dying, and prematurely obsolete processor technology. Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed, let's begin!
Round one: AMD vs. Intel - The Mainstream Choice
When your budget is tight and computer requirements easily satisfied by a mainstream desktop system, answering the AMD vs. Intel question starts something like this: What's the least expensive CPU with the most value, and are the platforms for that CPU stacked full of features? In other words, what's the best bang for buck?
Hands down, for mainstream PC needs the answer is AMD.
Before you go screaming to the PcHub feedback page, here's why we picked AMD for our mainstream CPU choice right now.
In just price alone, AMD’s chips are generally cheaper than comparable Intel chips. These processors don’t make very good upgrades, since they are so far on the cheap end — in fact, we recommend something like the $100 Ryzen 3 2200G for an entry level chip. That said, you’ll find similar pricing as you climb the performance ladder, with Intel’s offerings almost always coming in a little higher than AMD’s.
For the better part of a decade, this was the typical pricing scenario endured by most PC enthusiasts until the arrival of AMD’s new Ryzen CPUs. Their debut in early 2017 shook up that long-standing formula, with the Ryzen 7 1800X sitting at the top of the consumer-focused end of AMD’s spectrum at that time. Today the second-generation 2700X is the king of that pile, with eight cores, 16 threads and a price tag around $400. Intel’s current top consumer chip, the 9900K, comes with eight cores and 16 threads of its own, but its price is far higher, at $600.
Meanwhile, Intel Core i9 and AMD Threadripper CPUs targeting enthusiasts and prosumers offer even more multi-threaded performance and continue to expand the kind of core and thread counts that anyone can enjoy in a home-built system. Intel’s seventh and ninth-generation i9 CPUs offer between 10 and 18 cores and thanks to hyperthreading, up to 36 threads. Prices can be sky-high though, with the flagship 7960X costing as much as $2,000.
AMD’s chips, on the other hand, offer larger core counts, lower price points, and more uniform specifications throughout the range. The first-generation Threadripper CPUs have been heavily discounted as of late, with some of the eight and 12 core options. However, the new-generation Threadripper 2000-series CPUs offer between 12 and 32 cores and up to 64 threads with simultaneous multi-threading. They are more expensive options too, ranging between $1000 and $2,000. We recommend the Threadripper 2950x for $1,200 if you want one of these high-end upgrades for a really top-line PC setup.
All Threadripper chips support 64 PCI Express lanes, which is a big advantage over the Intel range’s maximum of 44. They are more power-hungry though, thanks to all those additional cores.
All of this means that the competition at the top end of the desktop CPU market is hotter than ever with plenty of choice for consumers, no matter their budget.
Round Two: AMD Vs Intel - Gaming
Gaming is one area where picking a CPU can get tricky. All of Intel’s processors include on-die integrated graphics, but the performance isn’t up to par with discrete, stand-alone graphics chips or add-in graphics cards. Meanwhile, AMD’s desktop processors do not include integrated graphics. Instead, AMD combines its processor cores and its Radeon-branded graphics cores into one package/chip called an APU. Although those tend to offer better performance than Intel’s on-die graphics solutions — especially with the new-generation Vega-powered models — they still don’t hold a candle to add-in graphics solutions that are only a little more expensive. Either way, you can expect to spend between $200 and $500 for mid-level gaming processors…and much more for stream-worthy gaming.
Those who take their gaming seriously use an add-in graphics card or a discrete GPU rather than integrated graphics. In those scenarios, Intel tends to dominate in gaming performance because of the way the two chip giants build their processors. Its 9900K is unarguably the most powerful gaming CPU available at this time .
AMD’s chips, and specifically its latest Ryzen CPUs, are excellent at multi-threaded scenarios and good at running applications that support multiple cores. Intel’s chips almost offer the reverse of that, losing out in heavy multi-threaded settings, but excelling in more restricted thread settings.
Games, although much more multi-threaded today than they were in the past, still rarely use more than two to four threads, which typically gives Intel the edge.
As for Threadripper versus extreme Core i9 chips, Intel still has the edge, especially with the Core i9-9900K. You can get this processor for around $600.
Final Round: AMD Vs Intel - Who Wins
During an everyday workload, a top-end AMD chip and a top-end Intel chip won’t produce radically different outcomes.
There are clear distinctions in specific scenarios and benchmarks, but the CPU isn’t the keystone of PC performance that it once was.
That said, AMD’s CPUs, especially at the mid-range and lower-end of the spectrum, do tend to offer slightly better value than Intel’s chips. Conversely, Intel CPUs have stronger single-core and gaming performance than even AMD’s best Threadripper CPUs. In return, those looking to use applications with a heavier multi-threaded focus should derive more benefit from a modern AMD CPU, especially with some of the big price cuts on first-generation Threadripper chips we’ve seen as of late.
When it comes to choosing your next upgrade, looking at the individual performance numbers of the chip you want to buy is still your best bet, but considering these general guidelines will give you a good foundation of where to start. AMD’s chips offer better bang for the buck for most users in the entry-level and midrange, even for gaming where the more expensive Intel chips are slightly better performers. That’s not the case once you get into 9900K territory at over $600, but AMD’s Threadripper chips are still a worthy consideration at that price point, especially if your CPU is going to be doing more working than playing.