Why is intel faster then amd? - Page 8 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

Why is intel faster then amd?

 
Thread Tools
Old 12-06-2011, 01:16 AM
Boinz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-06-2011, 01:17 AM
New to Overclock.net
MoarPowa Level 1
 
MoarPowa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arslay View Post

Architectural differences.
Inside the little silver chip are these little hamsters that build cities. Some hamsters use strong pillars yet some hamsters use crappy pillars-- The difference between Intel and AMD.
But in reality it IS differences in architecture. See some benchmarks .

LOL the best description of a cpu to date thumb.gif
MoarPowa is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 01:38 AM
hazarada Level 1
 
hazarada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,103
technically speaking amd IS faster, its holding the frequency world record isnt it? whether the clock speed is worth anything is another story.
hazarada is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-06-2011, 01:45 AM
PoopaScoopa is an unknown quantity at this point PoopaScoopa is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,313
Cause the hamster God says so. You must have faith.
PoopaScoopa is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 01:51 AM
Linux Lobbyist
Nnimrod Level 1
 
Nnimrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoopaScoopa View Post

Cause the hamster God says so. You must have faith.

love the profile pic *mmm... samischs*

wheee.gif Kpop! Yay! wheee.gif
"Lock horns, I push, and I strive. Somehow I feel more alive"


Nnimrod is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 02:07 AM
New to Overclock.net
Shadow11377 is an unknown quantity at this point Shadow11377 is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 1,479
First off Clock Speed does not mean everything. Their clock speeds and number of cores are similar but Intel CPUs outperform AMD (As of now) by a lot. AMD has been faster than Intel at times. Remember that.

This is going to be put simply, for the purpose of explanation.

CPU1 vs CPU2

CPU1 has 2 cores
CPU2 has 6 cores

Each core on CPU1 does 15 calculations per cyce, and has a clock speed of 1MHz
Each core on CPU2 does 4 calculations per cycle, and has a clock speed of 1MHz

CPU1 does 30 calculations per cycle (15 x 2cores)
CPU2 does 24 calculations per cycle (4 x 6cores)

CPU1 does 30,000,000 calculations per second (30 x 1,000,000 Cycles per Second) which equates to 30 FPS while Rendering Movie
CPU2 does 24,000,000 calculations per second (24 x 1,000,000 Cycles per second) which equates to 24 FPS while Rendering Movie

As you can see clock speed does not mean everything, neither does the amount of cores.
Even though CPU1 is a dual-core it manages to outperform the 6-core CPU2 due to more IPCs at an equal clock speed.

IPC = Instructions per Cycle, Instructions are what the CPU handles, like calculations in a calculator.
In general AMD and Intel produce CPUs with somewhat equal amount of Cores and Clock Speed, though AMD is going a bit more towards more cores, less IPCs while Intel is producing slightly less cores but increasing the IPCs.

So if AMD produces more cores with less IPCs than Intel, then applications that require raw speed rather than multiple cores will perform worse. A game like Minecraft is a good example. An 8 core CPU is useless with Minecraft, because it isn't coded to use multiple cores. A game that is coded for multiple threads for multicore CPUs will benefit from AMDs use of many cores, but most games these days don't benefit from more than if even 4 - and that is why people say Intel is Faster, because they just are. AMD chips can encode videos pretty good though, because most video encoding programs take full advantage of all available cores.

If you're looking to game don't focus on the number of cores but rather the performance per core.

Take a look at the following
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3960X+%40+3.30GHz
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
The new $1050 i7 3960X has 6 cores, and scored a 15000 CPU Score.
The "old" $300 i7 2600K has 4 cores, and scored a 10000 CPU Score.

Doing simple math you will find that
15,000/6=2,500
and
10,000/4=2,500

And due to that it is safe to assume that you will get no better performance in a game like Minecraft with the 3960K than you would with the 2600K because Minecraft can not use the extra 2 cores that were added.

You might find an AMD CPU that has better performance/core than one of Intels somewhere in mid-range but I don't think you will, however do some research and you might.

Shadow11377 is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 02:17 AM
New to Overclock.net
Hogwasher Level 1
 
Hogwasher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Oklahoma, US
Posts: 1,664
Never understood brand loyalty rolleyes.gif


I just buy what works for me and in my budget. I think its silly to get all upset over what a corporation does, or that my cpu is better then yours. It is what it is. Right now intel is selling the fastest and the most bang for the buck, so what?

Hogwasher is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 02:38 AM
Linux Lobbyist
Lifeshield is on a distinguished road Lifeshield is on a distinguished road Lifeshield is on a distinguished road Lifeshield is on a distinguished road
 
Lifeshield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 5,442


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow11377 View Post

First off Clock Speed does not mean everything. Their clock speeds and number of cores are similar but Intel CPUs outperform AMD (As of now) by a lot. AMD has been faster than Intel at times. Remember that.

This is going to be put simply, for the purpose of explanation.

CPU1 vs CPU2

CPU1 has 2 cores
CPU2 has 6 cores

Each core on CPU1 does 15 calculations per cyce, and has a clock speed of 1MHz
Each core on CPU2 does 4 calculations per cycle, and has a clock speed of 1MHz

CPU1 does 30 calculations per cycle (15 x 2cores)
CPU2 does 24 calculations per cycle (4 x 6cores)

CPU1 does 30,000,000 calculations per second (30 x 1,000,000 Cycles per Second) which equates to 30 FPS while Rendering Movie
CPU2 does 24,000,000 calculations per second (24 x 1,000,000 Cycles per second) which equates to 24 FPS while Rendering Movie

As you can see clock speed does not mean everything, neither does the amount of cores.
Even though CPU1 is a dual-core it manages to outperform the 6-core CPU2 due to more IPCs at an equal clock speed.

IPC = Instructions per Cycle, Instructions are what the CPU handles, like calculations in a calculator.
In general AMD and Intel produce CPUs with somewhat equal amount of Cores and Clock Speed, though AMD is going a bit more towards more cores, less IPCs while Intel is producing slightly less cores but increasing the IPCs.

So if AMD produces more cores with less IPCs than Intel, then applications that require raw speed rather than multiple cores will perform worse. A game like Minecraft is a good example. An 8 core CPU is useless with Minecraft, because it isn't coded to use multiple cores. A game that is coded for multiple threads for multicore CPUs will benefit from AMDs use of many cores, but most games these days don't benefit from more than if even 4 - and that is why people say Intel is Faster, because they just are. AMD chips can encode videos pretty good though, because most video encoding programs take full advantage of all available cores.

If you're looking to game don't focus on the number of cores but rather the performance per core.

Take a look at the following
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3960X+%40+3.30GHz
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
The new $1050 i7 3960X has 6 cores, and scored a 15000 CPU Score.
The "old" $300 i7 2600K has 4 cores, and scored a 10000 CPU Score.

Doing simple math you will find that
15,000/6=2,500
and
10,000/4=2,500

And due to that it is safe to assume that you will get no better performance in a game like Minecraft with the 3960K than you would with the 2600K because Minecraft can not use the extra 2 cores that were added.

You might find an AMD CPU that has better performance/core than one of Intels somewhere in mid-range but I don't think you will, however do some research and you might.


I wish there were more people on this website like you. Someone who can actually give an informed answer without being a fail Intel troll. Good information that will actually answer the OPs question instead of dumb analogies and idiotic troll pictures that don't actually answer anything.

 

If more people took the time to actually make posts like this instead of trolling n AMD whenever they get the chance to then OCN would no doubt be a much better place. Intel trolls take note!

 

+1.

 

Lifeshield is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 06:30 AM
Retired Staff
metallicamaster3 Level 1
 
metallicamaster3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Houston & NYC
Posts: 6,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifeshield View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow11377 View Post

First off Clock Speed does not mean everything. Their clock speeds and number of cores are similar but Intel CPUs outperform AMD (As of now) by a lot. AMD has been faster than Intel at times. Remember that.

This is going to be put simply, for the purpose of explanation.

CPU1 vs CPU2

CPU1 has 2 cores
CPU2 has 6 cores

Each core on CPU1 does 15 calculations per cyce, and has a clock speed of 1MHz
Each core on CPU2 does 4 calculations per cycle, and has a clock speed of 1MHz

CPU1 does 30 calculations per cycle (15 x 2cores)
CPU2 does 24 calculations per cycle (4 x 6cores)

CPU1 does 30,000,000 calculations per second (30 x 1,000,000 Cycles per Second) which equates to 30 FPS while Rendering Movie
CPU2 does 24,000,000 calculations per second (24 x 1,000,000 Cycles per second) which equates to 24 FPS while Rendering Movie

As you can see clock speed does not mean everything, neither does the amount of cores.
Even though CPU1 is a dual-core it manages to outperform the 6-core CPU2 due to more IPCs at an equal clock speed.

IPC = Instructions per Cycle, Instructions are what the CPU handles, like calculations in a calculator.
In general AMD and Intel produce CPUs with somewhat equal amount of Cores and Clock Speed, though AMD is going a bit more towards more cores, less IPCs while Intel is producing slightly less cores but increasing the IPCs.

So if AMD produces more cores with less IPCs than Intel, then applications that require raw speed rather than multiple cores will perform worse. A game like Minecraft is a good example. An 8 core CPU is useless with Minecraft, because it isn't coded to use multiple cores. A game that is coded for multiple threads for multicore CPUs will benefit from AMDs use of many cores, but most games these days don't benefit from more than if even 4 - and that is why people say Intel is Faster, because they just are. AMD chips can encode videos pretty good though, because most video encoding programs take full advantage of all available cores.

If you're looking to game don't focus on the number of cores but rather the performance per core.

Take a look at the following
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-3960X+%40+3.30GHz
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-2600K+%40+3.40GHz
The new $1050 i7 3960X has 6 cores, and scored a 15000 CPU Score.
The "old" $300 i7 2600K has 4 cores, and scored a 10000 CPU Score.

Doing simple math you will find that
15,000/6=2,500
and
10,000/4=2,500

And due to that it is safe to assume that you will get no better performance in a game like Minecraft with the 3960K than you would with the 2600K because Minecraft can not use the extra 2 cores that were added.

You might find an AMD CPU that has better performance/core than one of Intels somewhere in mid-range but I don't think you will, however do some research and you might.


I wish there were more people on this website like you. Someone who can actually give an informed answer without being a fail Intel troll. Good information that will actually answer the OPs question instead of dumb analogies and idiotic troll pictures that don't actually answer anything.

 

If more people took the time to actually make posts like this instead of trolling n AMD whenever they get the chance to then OCN would no doubt be a much better place. Intel trolls take note!

 

+1.

 


thumb.gif

I'm from Brooklyn, I'm the OG owner of the New Yorker Club


metallicamaster3 is offline  
Old 12-06-2011, 03:24 PM
New to Overclock.net
adridu59 is on a distinguished road adridu59 is on a distinguished road adridu59 is on a distinguished road adridu59 is on a distinguished road
 
adridu59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 6,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post

Because:
364

lachen.giflachen.giflachen.gif

thumb.gif

OCN's Recommended: Power SuppliesAudio Products

~ Sig now ToS compliant
adridu59 is offline  
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off