Wait 'till you find out LG stands for Lucky Goldstar and the Asus name came from Pegasus. That's why their industrial brand is called Pegatron, that's where the "peg" went.
You wanna know something funny? The M in MSI's MEG, MPG and MAG lines stands for MSI. So a boards full name may be ''Micro-Star International Micro-Star International Enthusiast Gaming X670 Extreme Godlike''
>I didnt realize that is what msi stood for LOL
Back when they were still Micro-Star International they sold mostly budget crap that most people would avoid.
I have never seen someone make reviews so personal. I can't remember for which amd gpu, but I recall one review that is 10% about the gpu (still calls it bad), and the other 90% is him ranting about AMDs market share.
It was copy pasted on every single 7 series GPU and parts of it were on every single 5 or 7 series cpu. Literally just copy pasted the rant with a very small blurb about whatever GPU/cpu. The 7900 xt and xtx are literally the same review.
Sounds entirely like "Tortilla Squad" a Youtube clown from Mexico, that basically for everything he pulls the Steam survey and says that the RTX 4060 > RX7900XTX because it's upper in the charts and says: "the market has spoken".
That's like saying 9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape. What's next... "Hey guys, wait until you hear about this awesome thing called polio. Millions got it so it can't be bad, right?"
Haha, it's always fun to compare AMD anything to whatever in userbenchmarks and see them go completely off the rails ranting about how awful AMD and the fan bois are. Pretty sure they'd praise RTX 3050 over RX 7900 XTX just to avoid having to say anything nice about AMD.
Are the actual 'stats' on userbenchmark correct? Like the descriptions are incredibly bias but if I pull up like 3080 vs 6700 and only look at the numbers can I trust it?
Nah not really, just check the TechPowerUp spec sheet for one of them and it’ll have a table that will show the comparable performance of it compared to the vast majority of GPUs out there
Go compare RX 6700 XT and RTX 3070 and see. The 3070 is not 22% faster as they claim, in most titles these cards are tied where one can outperform the other in certain favoured game titles. They are possibly the least reliable source for comparison on the internet.
Ya I have a 6750xt and a good buddy has a 3070, we regularly game together and I would say it's about 50-50 on who has better performance when we compare.
And for almost everyone, a prebuilt using one or the other will perform basically the same in most tasks. The only exceptions where it will make a really big difference is if you are using integrated graphics or are limited by PCIe lanes for some reason.
Yea, it's good for the average user, but sucks for the enthusiast. I've been overclocking since high school and while my 14700k is running everything great, it is disappointing on the OC aspect.
Off the top of my head, my OC journey went like this-
Got a few mhz extra on my 1st pc (133mhz P1)
2.8ghz Pentium 4 at 3.2ghz (14%)
2.4ghz Core2Quad at 3ghz (25%)
3.8ghz i5 4670k at 4.2ghz (11%)
4.3ghz i5 8600k at 4.8ghz (12%)
5.5ghz 14700k at 5.7ghz (4%)
Not even worth it for most people now.
That’s because manufacturers are clocking these as close to unstable as possible to gain all the clock speeds they can for use in marketing. The thresholds are getting tighter and tighter making it more difficult to really see any substantial gains from OC’ing on your own.
While the average gamer doesn't care, because of marketing the average person thinks intel and Nvidia are the better brands. I've even heard someone say AMD is just a cheap Chinese knockoff
I think the average gamer does lean towards Intel because they're more likely to have heard of it, kind of like Apple. When I first got into PCs my friend who has been using a gaming PC for yrs told me AMD is buggy and not as good as Intel. The public perception of the casual gamer is Intel+Nvidia = better.
It might be just my age group but because intel had the Pentium 2 and 3 and for the longest time almost all laptops are intel people just think "The only good one".
Even my sister who isn't in computers at all was like isn't AMD bad?
I'm like no they are just as good if not better for CPUs even the GPUs are not bad.
It just shows how little any of these companies really care about PR and make there sales on networking and such and PC people that want to build stuff will get the best stuff.
I go where the performance is.
If AMD is the top dog, I go AMD, same with intel
It's when the performance has parity that I prefer AMD because their motherboard features are most often closer to my needs than Intel's, which is what I went with on my current build
But longevity? I did a mental thought experiment and turned out that it most likely wouldn't have mattered in my case: if I had first gen Ryzen, I wouldn't have waited until the 300 mobos got the bios update to support the 5000 series boards, I would have bought a new board to support 5000 series. It wouldn't have mattered if I bought 3000 series since the boards would support just two gens anyway, so the only possible time I could have benefitted from the longevity of the platform is if I went from 1000 to 3000 Ryzen or 2000 to 5000, but 1000 and 2000 were still behind intel comparatively, it wasn't until 3000/5000 where performance reached parity.
Having the option is nice, but given my upgrade habits, longevity wouldn't have mattered in all likelihood.
I went from 1000 to 3000 and only changed my mobo to get pcie4 support for my new M.2 at the time.
On 5800x3d now, same B550 motherboard my 3900X was in (latter is running my daughter's PC happily on my old B350 board with a BIOS update).
I'll likely keep what I have now for another generation or two of Zen, so I might be looking at AM6 by the time I'm ready for another CPU upgrade.
As happy as i am going from am4 to am5 i agree its better to wait another gen or two and just go a full socket upgrade
The price going from a 5600x to a 5800x3d was insanse since i basically had to purchase everything again due to hardware failure so i spent an extra 100 and got a 7800x3d combo
I went from a 1700 to a 5900x, same motherboard. I dont care about PCIe 4, so no point changing my super high end crosshair 6 hero for something cheaper.
I bought Ryzen a few months after it's release, 7 year old motherboard still going strong!
From an E-Waste perspective... The longevity gives you the options and makes resale far more viable, thus bringing down the cost and creating a used vs new competition in the market. It's just good for consumers, even if a large portion won't care
Back when CPU advancements were meaningful (early 1999-2012ish) almost everyone went:
Athlon - Pentium 4 - Athlon 64 - Core 2 Duo - i5-2500K
People didn't do this whole Team Green/Blue dance because these really weren't comparable products, they were really revolutionary advancements. Nothing since has come close. I was using my 2500k in 2020 and pulling 60 FPS with a modern mid-range GPU (RX 570) at FHD in most titles. Unless you're buying $2000 monitors, anything from the past 6 years is more than fine.
TLDR
-The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about.
-Intel offers better value in both the budget and mid-range segments.
-AMD's greater power efficiency isn't a huge deal when choosing a gaming CPU.
Like are they for real?! I'm I missing something?!
All of that is pretty much true if we assume the "average gamer" is buying a $1000 prebuilt gaming PC. But the thing is, this average gamer likely doesn't care about Intel vs. AMD.
>-The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about.
Bro what? This is one of the biggest reasons why I prefer AMD. With Intel, processor swap means almost certainly a motherboard swap. With AMD, not so much.
Yeah but it alot more of a pain in the ass to swap out a motherboard than it is to simply swap out a CPU. Last MB upgrade, I completely rebuilt my PC into a new case.
"Average gamer"
You think the average gamer is installing and repasting a CPU? I personally don't even do that shit because a PC will last a good 8 years and the sockets are dead by then.
That's why I moved to Ryzen when they dropped back in 2017? Did one motherboard swap since then because i was changing formfactor, and im still on my B450 board with 5800X3D that works fine.
The A620 ITX board that I’m using that has decent VRMs will likely be able to handle whatever Ryzen 7 x3D is out in a couple generations. While the Intel chumps are buying another $150-200 board for their brand new i7/i9 in a couple years, I’ll be saving a couple hundred dollars, drawing a third of the power, and still probably getting better gaming performance than them. “Longevity doesn’t matter” my ass.
-The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about.
guess i'm not the "average gamer" then.
also, greater power efficiency = less noise, also less cooling required = less electricity cost.
Since you're on an online forum about PC hardware, you're not your average gamer. Even more so if you built your PC yourself.
The average guy buys a prebuild or laptop and doesn't care about the hardware for the next couple of years until it's time to buy a prebuild again.
If this sub represented the actual market, the actual GPU market share would be reversed.
The "average gamer" is picking something off the shelf regardless of the CPU. That's not who this article is aimed at though, as it's aimed at someone who is actually building his own PC
Most people don't really think about power usage when choosing a PC, they just look at 'number is bigger, must be better' or 'this fits my budget, I'll get this'
I did read the article, and couple of points.
First is that this is advice aimed at the average gamer. Which means someone who just wants to buy stuff that is good at a price they can afford. They aren't looking at power efficiency, they don't care about which is better for OCing, and they are most definitely NOT looking to spend 3-4k on a rig.
So in that regard, their points are "solid", which are essentially Intel is more "noob friendly" in terms of troubleshooting driver issues, it has great options at the mid and low range, and the point on Intel changing their sockets faster than I change underwear is entirely moot because these kind of buyers are going to buy their rig and sit on it until it breaks completely and they have to buy another low/mid range CPU 6-odd years down the line.
Perpetual memory training.
Expo instability.
Glacier boot times.
Mutli-CCD process affinity.
And lets not forget the Eyy-Soos silicon cook-off. Both companies have bones to pick with overvolting motherboards.
I love "amd is not better ergo intel is better" arguments. Sure lets disregard power efficiency and platform longevity. That makes them equal offerings. Intel doesnt magically gain anything if you dont care about particular aspect of amd product. Modern journalism sure is a joke.
This is ridiculous. Intel‘s CPUs draw about double the power to AMD‘s (especially the X3D SKUs are outstanding in terms of efficiency).
In regions where power is expensive (EU, etc.) the cost of power of an i5 would allow me to upgrade to a 7800X3D.
Intel has also pretty consistently had better single-core performance, which is important especially in a lot of legacy games (and unfortunately even now too many modern games lol). Even if AM5 longevity isn't something the average gamer cared about, it sounds like a great excuse to educate someone who may not be into hardware rather than go with "lol just choose Intel" like the author of the article clearly wants to do. There are obviously some merits to either one, to always recommend one over the other shows the author clearly doesn't really understand anything.
I thought you were making a great point until I realized you only quoted them
but yes, thats what gamers care about
AM5 platform longevity? Thats arguments you hear on reddit by people still on a 4790k
Not by people who go to bestbuy to get a new "gaming PC", aka most people
The thing most ppl when they buy a PC they will use it years without upgrading it like if a person buys a 14700k it will hold for most like 2-4 years and then am5 is dead too
If you don't exclusively game, but use it for both work and gaming, Intel starts to make more sense. But also depends what you do more , if it's like "I game 90% of the time " and wat to edit a video once in awhile it still better to go AMD. But if you use if for work on daily basis might be worth to spend little more/sacrifice a little too end gaming performance for overall performance and multitasking.
For workloads you might want to check for specifically your needs. Answer wont be the same for all cases.
In general AMD still have very good workload cpus, but so does intel.
Serious question - I have built two computers now both using Intel CPUs and I genuinely don’t understand what difference I would see by going AMD when I am running everything at mad settings with no issues using Intel.
What benefit do I really gain by choosing one over the other that as an average PC user, I would definitely notice?
Amd power efficiency doesn't matter? You save money on a less expensive cooler, it runs more silent, you also save money on a less expensive psu and electricity costs
Power efficiency only matters when intel or nividia is more efficient. If amd is, it suddenly doesn't matter.
The issue is AMD x3d chips are not only better for gaming than Intel price equivalent, they are about 100w to 200w more efficient in the process. This is causing traditional Intel is better people to completely melt down
They should.
Does the average consumer have air conditioning running all year round because they don’t prioritized powers savings?
People buy efficient lights all the time what make a computer different lmao
I bought my Intel i5-12600k because it was on a massive sale with an Asus ROG MOBO. It has worked well for me since then. However, if I had to upgrade today I would be switching to team Red.
Intel is ~70% of consumer CPUs. About 60% of LP market.
It is plug-and-play for most configurations. Not issues with RAM or memory controllers.
Better at Adobe and production applications.
But AMD have X3D. Fair enough.
From what I've seen some of those i5 chips are great value for performance.
Takes me back but the comments in this thread remind me of when people were shitting bricks because Ivy Lake was so good.
For average users AMD is the better choice. Better efficiency, affordability and overall power usage. On Intel's side these aspects got completely out of hand.
"simple reasons why" *probably proceeds to go through the most convoluted mental gymnastics possible*
Edit: went to the blog, 2 out of the 4 reasons are "AMD does actually do this better, but does it really matter?" And the other 2 are outright wrong.
This is hilarious.
"The Core i5-13600KF can be seen retailing frequently for under $250, at which point it becomes a more tempting choice compared to the slightly cheaper Ryzen 5 7600X (~$225). This is because these two chips deliver similar gaming performance"
So the more expensive chip is better because it's about the same? He does go on to say that the i5 wins in some games, but that also means it ties or loses in other games. Am I the crazy one? "The more expensive chip is a better value because it sometimes beats a cheaper chip" is nonsense to me.
Older Intels on sale can be a better buy since they have been so cheap, but I'd pay extra to go from a14th gen k chip to 7800x3d for gaming. The extra performance, and more efficient (cooler/quieter) AMD is worth it.
>12400f
And AMD has its 5600x and its performing around 12% better in Gaming. And in Germany they cost around the same.
And for around 160-170€, the 12600kf is around this Price in Germany, you also get a Ryzen 5 7500f and its performing more or less the same and you are on a modern plattform. I know, 32GB DDR5 Ram cost a bit more, but its just around 30-40€ more than 32Gigs of DDR4
In my opinion, i dont know the prices in America, AMD is also the better choise for budget builds
The average gamer doesn't go to XDA for opinions either. Windows Central and The Verge are other places that have bad takes on PC hardware. They just want an opportunity to inject their affiliate links.
it's click bait indeed.
I don't care if AMD is better than Intel or Vice versa. is what I can do with my budget to get the best I can.
I live in a third world country So Price/Performance is what I look for.
Did they completely forget to mention 7800x3d? And 5800x3d? The 7800x3d beats the entire Intel lineup in gaming for like what, $350? While using less than half the power of the Intel chips?
I like products from both companies but this article seems like a biased tinfoil Intel shill wrote it?
Eh. Kinda agree.
I think about it this way: If I were to spec a budget build for a family member where I try not to be called for tech support what parts will I choose. I'd probably go with an Intel CPU.
As someone who usually buys Intel, nearly every point this guy makes is stupid.
With maybe the exception of the Ryzen memory issues. I’ve got one machine that’s unstable and crashes periodically. It’s my only Ryzen machine. It runs a media server on a 7600X and 6000 CL30 memory. I haven’t really had the time to dig into the cause, but maybe I just need to drop the memory down. I doubt I’d see any performance loss running at JDEC speeds.
I like my 13700k and I got a good deal on it with the mobo. Msi tomahawk.
Had everything I wanted at a good price and it preforms just fine with my 3090 in games. And preforms just fine by itself in other apps.
Meanwhile be me and use everything amd+amd (r5 4600h + rx 5600m) in laptop (lent it my brother as he used my old desktop that died) and now in legion go + onexgpu (ryzen z1e + rx7600m egpu) and intel + intel in my desktop (i5-13600k + A770) didn't used nvidia from long time and my last was 2x gtx 960 4gb in SLI + i7-4790k in my dead desktop (mobo died last year pc won't post and tested all i could rams and other cpu psu and shit.) honestly i don't think im going to use Nvidia until they release some good performance card for low price (don't want to sell liver or kidney for gpu) and not some kind of castrate like 4060 with low ram and bandwith that have almost no performance uplift vs previous gen.
Idk the prices in the US but in my country the R5-7600 is 200€, the 7600X 210€ and the 13600k is 300€. With the motherboards also being 10-20€ more expensive. At the lower end the 13100 and the 5600(X) are around the same price with Intel motherboards being way more expensive. And in all price ranges you will pay more even if you find the hardware at identical prices because IT LITERALLY NEEDS MORE POWER. Idk which fairy land the author lives but have you seen the electricity costs since COVID alongside the inflation and the wages that remain practically the same? Yeah, it fricking matters.
I would if agreed with this with AM4 from like 2017 to 2021.
Never forget the constant bios updates to fix random issues.
RAM compatibility with first gen... USB issues introduced around zen2... fTPM stutter that took over a year for them to fix with X570. There was a lot of annoying little things Intel generally didn't deal with.
But now AMD has their shit together and is generally the easier recommend.
You're making the mistake many people are making today. You should never call it "an i9" or "an i7". A 9900T is an i9, but is slower than a 14700k that is an i7.
AMD's naming scheme is really easy, for gaming you want X3D (bigger number is better), for everything else you also want the bigger number.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are not correct. Depending on your task for example gaming, sometimes i7 with higher clock speed might be better for gaming than more muticore focused i9, even though the i9 will have more total power or benchmark score. So even though generally you would be correct it's still task dependant.
According to Steam's hardware survey, most gamers agree. 68% have Intel, 32% have AMD. [Steam Hardware & Software Survey (steampowered.com)](https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey)
Have to say i agree. Last 2 machines were AMD cpus and they both had weird issues with some games. ESPECIALLY the one w AMD gpu. The latest build i went 12600k and 3080 and it hasn’t had any of that weirdness. I can’t entirely just say amd bad intel good, and the AMD pricepoint (esp when you factor in the mainboard) is enticing… but at the end of the day i would say I agree. Less hassle with my intel build for sure.
I go where the performance is. I had a 3600x, then 12700k, now a 7800x3D. Couldn't care less about the brand as long as I'm getting solid performance and features.
Might be the guy behind UserBenchmark. This whole article is just "There are so many good reasons for AMD over Intel but those don't matter because reasons"
AMD is cheaper and does what i need it to do. I use AMD.
Using Intel feels like using Apple just because it's Apple.
I use Samsung for the same reason I use AMD
Only chosen team blue because I heard it was very hard to mount my LF III 360 on amd mount.
Novice builder so preferred safer than sorry because I am careless. Maybe would have chosen AM5 if I was on another AIO cooler brand. Next 5-10 years, will probably build with team red if it could maintain current performance against intel.
The other benefit that people don’t often realize about the longer motherboard support of AMD is that it makes motherboards cheaper. Let’s say I am on a budget so I buy a motherboard from when 3000 series came out to go with my 5000 series chip. It’s been out for a while so the price is lower. While for most people this is a fringe benefit, for me at least it’s pretty convenient.
Idk ill always go for the best for the money i spend. If team red is the top i wont go for lower performance but same or higher price thats americans apple brainwash mentality
Edit: im sorry folks for throwing facts like that im not trying to insult anyone there taste differs from person to person but im taking care of my money more then choising a women even if the second in long time is more financial damaging xD
The term "CPU for gaming" is a little off, there is no such thing, you can easly go with i3 for many years and switch GPUs multiple times before you gona get CPU bottlenecked, and usualy gamers change entire rig before that happens.
1, I am a blindly devoted to Intel
2, I get paid by them
3, Had one bad experience 20 years ago with AMD
4, Gf told me to simp for Intel or no sexy time
I used to prefer intel when AMDs perf wasnt on par
But now it is basically same perf with lot less power and heat
And not to forget longer socket support
My AMD friends always run into more small bugs and issues than our Intel friends. I know y’all don’t want to hear it and will say it’s bullshit but……2 of my 4 amd buddies have already switched to Intel and couldn’t be happier.
"You can spare $50 for a budget CPU cooler. There's no dearth of excellent air coolers capable of taming even the Core i9-14900K. You don't even need a fancy AIO liquid cooler."
Talk about the joke of the century; I have to undervolt my 13900k with the assassin 4 for semi decent temps without it trying to take off. And I can tell you it costs a bit more than just $50. I'm still under the impression that 13900k runs cooler than 14900k...
Truee https://preview.redd.it/3vbpz1q5qewc1.jpeg?width=507&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=27d03ea0df1e304e4412e2add863e2667562d658
AMD fucking sucks I'm sorry it's just true, Advance Micro Devices is where it's at though and they are top dog for a reason.
MSI is garbage, it's all about Micro-Star international
I didnt realize that is what msi stood for LOL
It also stands for Microsoft installer too
And, while it isn’t PC-related, Mindless Self Indulgence.
In what world is mindless self indulgence not pc-related?
As a gamer first but then a system admin, i was so confused during m'y studies when i Saw "MSI"
Wait 'till you find out LG stands for Lucky Goldstar and the Asus name came from Pegasus. That's why their industrial brand is called Pegatron, that's where the "peg" went.
Who is asus and why does he like getting pegged?
you'll know when you try it
You wanna know something funny? The M in MSI's MEG, MPG and MAG lines stands for MSI. So a boards full name may be ''Micro-Star International Micro-Star International Enthusiast Gaming X670 Extreme Godlike''
Thanks, Steve!
Back to you, Steve
Just wait till you hear about DC Comics
>I didnt realize that is what msi stood for LOL Back when they were still Micro-Star International they sold mostly budget crap that most people would avoid.
ROG is also shit, Republic of gamers is where it's at
 Jo-star international is the real GOAT
I hate LG. I only use Lucky Goldstar products.
ATI 4 LYF
ATI is garbage, Radeon is so much better
“I don’t want Obamacare! I have the Affordable Care Act!”
Omg I remember the reddit post where this was an actual thing Screen grabs of a Facebook comment section where some idiot actually thought this
MICRO? HAHA HA I buy my only MACRO processors , like HUGE, every transistor is at least 1CM.
I prefer radeon.
Radeon my nuts because I hate them >:(
GeForce RTX > > Nvidia
RTX On >>> Ray Tracing On
This guy managed to confuse even amd
LENNY???? YNNELL??
HAHA found yeh Lenneh!
Lenneh boy!
LEEENNNYYYYYY
https://youtu.be/JiShVGbEpuY?si=mOpJ91snnUFiQ5X6
Lmao this picture is brilliant
i think they are sponsored by UserBenchmarks XD
I have never seen someone make reviews so personal. I can't remember for which amd gpu, but I recall one review that is 10% about the gpu (still calls it bad), and the other 90% is him ranting about AMDs market share.
It’s all of them. lol
It was copy pasted on every single 7 series GPU and parts of it were on every single 5 or 7 series cpu. Literally just copy pasted the rant with a very small blurb about whatever GPU/cpu. The 7900 xt and xtx are literally the same review.
"AMD continues to fall down the market. Be careful if you purchase these gpus. " What a dumb asshole he is.
Sounds entirely like "Tortilla Squad" a Youtube clown from Mexico, that basically for everything he pulls the Steam survey and says that the RTX 4060 > RX7900XTX because it's upper in the charts and says: "the market has spoken".
That's like saying 9 out of 10 people enjoy gang rape. What's next... "Hey guys, wait until you hear about this awesome thing called polio. Millions got it so it can't be bad, right?"
On the 5800x3D review UB says it sucks and only "AMD reddit troglodytes" say it's worth anything lmao.
“Watch out for the cherry picked streamer sponsored reviews!”
"Streamers and YouTubers are handsomely paid to promote their products and as always singing their own praises"
It sure seem like it 😂
Haha, it's always fun to compare AMD anything to whatever in userbenchmarks and see them go completely off the rails ranting about how awful AMD and the fan bois are. Pretty sure they'd praise RTX 3050 over RX 7900 XTX just to avoid having to say anything nice about AMD.
The guy I sold my 3070ti to told me I'm "downgrading" to a 7900xtx.. 😞
Yeah, that's how mislead consumers are by certain sources of information.
Yes because I don't need upscaling, my card must be inferior 😔. I have no words..
Are the actual 'stats' on userbenchmark correct? Like the descriptions are incredibly bias but if I pull up like 3080 vs 6700 and only look at the numbers can I trust it?
i3's faster than threadrippers and i5's faster than i7's of the same generation. It's wholly useless.
Nah not really, just check the TechPowerUp spec sheet for one of them and it’ll have a table that will show the comparable performance of it compared to the vast majority of GPUs out there
Go compare RX 6700 XT and RTX 3070 and see. The 3070 is not 22% faster as they claim, in most titles these cards are tied where one can outperform the other in certain favoured game titles. They are possibly the least reliable source for comparison on the internet.
Ya I have a 6750xt and a good buddy has a 3070, we regularly game together and I would say it's about 50-50 on who has better performance when we compare.
The average gamers doesn't care about all about Intel-AMD shenanigans They just want to play
And for almost everyone, a prebuilt using one or the other will perform basically the same in most tasks. The only exceptions where it will make a really big difference is if you are using integrated graphics or are limited by PCIe lanes for some reason.
Isn’t most prebuilts have a locked bios so you can’t overclock?
overclocking doesn't really matter much for the average person anymore
Yeah, I find that the slight instability in some applications isn’t really worth the very minor performance increase
Same, I used to overclock when I first started PC gaming but now it seems pointless.
Undervolting is amazing though
Yea, it's good for the average user, but sucks for the enthusiast. I've been overclocking since high school and while my 14700k is running everything great, it is disappointing on the OC aspect. Off the top of my head, my OC journey went like this- Got a few mhz extra on my 1st pc (133mhz P1) 2.8ghz Pentium 4 at 3.2ghz (14%) 2.4ghz Core2Quad at 3ghz (25%) 3.8ghz i5 4670k at 4.2ghz (11%) 4.3ghz i5 8600k at 4.8ghz (12%) 5.5ghz 14700k at 5.7ghz (4%) Not even worth it for most people now.
That’s because manufacturers are clocking these as close to unstable as possible to gain all the clock speeds they can for use in marketing. The thresholds are getting tighter and tighter making it more difficult to really see any substantial gains from OC’ing on your own.
I would also imagine 90% of prebuilt owners wouldn’t be overlocking anyways
Overclocking is pointless
While the average gamer doesn't care, because of marketing the average person thinks intel and Nvidia are the better brands. I've even heard someone say AMD is just a cheap Chinese knockoff
I think the average gamer does lean towards Intel because they're more likely to have heard of it, kind of like Apple. When I first got into PCs my friend who has been using a gaming PC for yrs told me AMD is buggy and not as good as Intel. The public perception of the casual gamer is Intel+Nvidia = better.
It might be just my age group but because intel had the Pentium 2 and 3 and for the longest time almost all laptops are intel people just think "The only good one". Even my sister who isn't in computers at all was like isn't AMD bad? I'm like no they are just as good if not better for CPUs even the GPUs are not bad. It just shows how little any of these companies really care about PR and make there sales on networking and such and PC people that want to build stuff will get the best stuff.
I go where the performance is. If AMD is the top dog, I go AMD, same with intel It's when the performance has parity that I prefer AMD because their motherboard features are most often closer to my needs than Intel's, which is what I went with on my current build But longevity? I did a mental thought experiment and turned out that it most likely wouldn't have mattered in my case: if I had first gen Ryzen, I wouldn't have waited until the 300 mobos got the bios update to support the 5000 series boards, I would have bought a new board to support 5000 series. It wouldn't have mattered if I bought 3000 series since the boards would support just two gens anyway, so the only possible time I could have benefitted from the longevity of the platform is if I went from 1000 to 3000 Ryzen or 2000 to 5000, but 1000 and 2000 were still behind intel comparatively, it wasn't until 3000/5000 where performance reached parity. Having the option is nice, but given my upgrade habits, longevity wouldn't have mattered in all likelihood.
I went from 1000 to 3000 and only changed my mobo to get pcie4 support for my new M.2 at the time. On 5800x3d now, same B550 motherboard my 3900X was in (latter is running my daughter's PC happily on my old B350 board with a BIOS update). I'll likely keep what I have now for another generation or two of Zen, so I might be looking at AM6 by the time I'm ready for another CPU upgrade.
As happy as i am going from am4 to am5 i agree its better to wait another gen or two and just go a full socket upgrade The price going from a 5600x to a 5800x3d was insanse since i basically had to purchase everything again due to hardware failure so i spent an extra 100 and got a 7800x3d combo
I went from a 1700 to a 5900x, same motherboard. I dont care about PCIe 4, so no point changing my super high end crosshair 6 hero for something cheaper. I bought Ryzen a few months after it's release, 7 year old motherboard still going strong!
Yeah, I've had both over the years. I'm not loyal to any companies, like some people seem to be. I go where I get most out of my money.
went from a 2600 to a 5700x and with that bumped up the ram from 16gb3200 to 32gb3200, super happy with it
My mate went from a 2700x to an 5800x3d and he really loves the upgrade.
From an E-Waste perspective... The longevity gives you the options and makes resale far more viable, thus bringing down the cost and creating a used vs new competition in the market. It's just good for consumers, even if a large portion won't care
These companies are not your friend and am not loyal toward neither. I go where I could get the most out of my hard earned money.
Back when CPU advancements were meaningful (early 1999-2012ish) almost everyone went: Athlon - Pentium 4 - Athlon 64 - Core 2 Duo - i5-2500K People didn't do this whole Team Green/Blue dance because these really weren't comparable products, they were really revolutionary advancements. Nothing since has come close. I was using my 2500k in 2020 and pulling 60 FPS with a modern mid-range GPU (RX 570) at FHD in most titles. Unless you're buying $2000 monitors, anything from the past 6 years is more than fine.
2500k the super champ. Ran for 12 years and just finally got upgraded.
TLDR -The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about. -Intel offers better value in both the budget and mid-range segments. -AMD's greater power efficiency isn't a huge deal when choosing a gaming CPU. Like are they for real?! I'm I missing something?!
All of that is pretty much true if we assume the "average gamer" is buying a $1000 prebuilt gaming PC. But the thing is, this average gamer likely doesn't care about Intel vs. AMD.
>-The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about. Bro what? This is one of the biggest reasons why I prefer AMD. With Intel, processor swap means almost certainly a motherboard swap. With AMD, not so much.
I USED to not care about this, but now even basic motherboard prices are starting to rival the cost of the CPU itself.
Yeah but it alot more of a pain in the ass to swap out a motherboard than it is to simply swap out a CPU. Last MB upgrade, I completely rebuilt my PC into a new case.
Bang on mate. The 7900f I'm eyeing is cheaper than the WiFi motherboard I'm looking at.
[удалено]
When I hear, “average gamers.” My mind automatically thinks of Minecraft kids playing games.
The average gamer is actually a 50 year old woman playing candy crush on her phone
And she just spent more money yesterday than i did in my last 10 years of gaming smh my head
"Average gamer" You think the average gamer is installing and repasting a CPU? I personally don't even do that shit because a PC will last a good 8 years and the sockets are dead by then.
Average gamers mostly play consoles nowadays.
Smartphone
That's why I moved to Ryzen when they dropped back in 2017? Did one motherboard swap since then because i was changing formfactor, and im still on my B450 board with 5800X3D that works fine.
The A620 ITX board that I’m using that has decent VRMs will likely be able to handle whatever Ryzen 7 x3D is out in a couple generations. While the Intel chumps are buying another $150-200 board for their brand new i7/i9 in a couple years, I’ll be saving a couple hundred dollars, drawing a third of the power, and still probably getting better gaming performance than them. “Longevity doesn’t matter” my ass.
-The AM5 platform longevity isn't something the average gamer cares about. guess i'm not the "average gamer" then. also, greater power efficiency = less noise, also less cooling required = less electricity cost.
Since you're on an online forum about PC hardware, you're not your average gamer. Even more so if you built your PC yourself. The average guy buys a prebuild or laptop and doesn't care about the hardware for the next couple of years until it's time to buy a prebuild again. If this sub represented the actual market, the actual GPU market share would be reversed.
The average guy either buys a pre-built or has a friend that knows how to make a good pc without selling a kidney
The "average gamer" is picking something off the shelf regardless of the CPU. That's not who this article is aimed at though, as it's aimed at someone who is actually building his own PC
**
Dunno man, there's a possibility.
Dude has a $1,000 gpu and thinks "guess I'm not your average gamer." Factually, you are not.
Apparently, also cares about electricity costs with a build like that.
My first thought as well…posting comments on pcmasterrace probably rules out average gamer too. Lol
7950x + 4080 No, I would not say that you are the average gamer.
Average gamers definitely don't know what AM5 is
Most people don't really think about power usage when choosing a PC, they just look at 'number is bigger, must be better' or 'this fits my budget, I'll get this'
They just make a vague claim and then spend the rest of the article ranting about how literally every advantage AMD has doesn’t matter?
TLDR TLDR AMD is better but eh
I can't be arsed reading the article, but dud they give any (solid) reasons as to why intel is definitively better? Or just reasons why AMD isn't?
I did read the article, and couple of points. First is that this is advice aimed at the average gamer. Which means someone who just wants to buy stuff that is good at a price they can afford. They aren't looking at power efficiency, they don't care about which is better for OCing, and they are most definitely NOT looking to spend 3-4k on a rig. So in that regard, their points are "solid", which are essentially Intel is more "noob friendly" in terms of troubleshooting driver issues, it has great options at the mid and low range, and the point on Intel changing their sockets faster than I change underwear is entirely moot because these kind of buyers are going to buy their rig and sit on it until it breaks completely and they have to buy another low/mid range CPU 6-odd years down the line.
Funny, the only CPUs having major issues right now with random crashes are 13th/14th Gen. What "driver issues" with AMD CPUs have there been?
Perpetual memory training. Expo instability. Glacier boot times. Mutli-CCD process affinity. And lets not forget the Eyy-Soos silicon cook-off. Both companies have bones to pick with overvolting motherboards.
Solid reason i dont think so, i did post on my first comment a short TLDR what their main points are about.
I love "amd is not better ergo intel is better" arguments. Sure lets disregard power efficiency and platform longevity. That makes them equal offerings. Intel doesnt magically gain anything if you dont care about particular aspect of amd product. Modern journalism sure is a joke.
This is ridiculous. Intel‘s CPUs draw about double the power to AMD‘s (especially the X3D SKUs are outstanding in terms of efficiency). In regions where power is expensive (EU, etc.) the cost of power of an i5 would allow me to upgrade to a 7800X3D.
The wording sounds and makes me feel like when I read user benchmark stuff.
Intel has also pretty consistently had better single-core performance, which is important especially in a lot of legacy games (and unfortunately even now too many modern games lol). Even if AM5 longevity isn't something the average gamer cared about, it sounds like a great excuse to educate someone who may not be into hardware rather than go with "lol just choose Intel" like the author of the article clearly wants to do. There are obviously some merits to either one, to always recommend one over the other shows the author clearly doesn't really understand anything.
Lmao i like how 2 of the 4 reasons they give is that things amd does better apparently dont matter.
Lol they have no clue. Right now AMD is just the better for gaming. It's like people are desperate to see AMD fail
I thought you were making a great point until I realized you only quoted them but yes, thats what gamers care about AM5 platform longevity? Thats arguments you hear on reddit by people still on a 4790k Not by people who go to bestbuy to get a new "gaming PC", aka most people
The thing most ppl when they buy a PC they will use it years without upgrading it like if a person buys a 14700k it will hold for most like 2-4 years and then am5 is dead too
Would this be the same for a production setup? Say for 3d work, rendering etc.
If you don't exclusively game, but use it for both work and gaming, Intel starts to make more sense. But also depends what you do more , if it's like "I game 90% of the time " and wat to edit a video once in awhile it still better to go AMD. But if you use if for work on daily basis might be worth to spend little more/sacrifice a little too end gaming performance for overall performance and multitasking.
Funny how the turn tables. 3 years ago intel was go to if you do nothing but game and amd if you literally do anything else.
Thanks for the reply
For workloads you might want to check for specifically your needs. Answer wont be the same for all cases. In general AMD still have very good workload cpus, but so does intel.
Serious question - I have built two computers now both using Intel CPUs and I genuinely don’t understand what difference I would see by going AMD when I am running everything at mad settings with no issues using Intel. What benefit do I really gain by choosing one over the other that as an average PC user, I would definitely notice?
Probably couple more percent fps if you are not playing 4k.
Intel has advantages and disadvantages but it's not trash
True, it’s far from the clear better option in this scenario though.
Amd power efficiency doesn't matter? You save money on a less expensive cooler, it runs more silent, you also save money on a less expensive psu and electricity costs
You also heat your room less in summer.
Con: Freezing in winter
Pro: freezing in winter
Power efficiency only matters when intel or nividia is more efficient. If amd is, it suddenly doesn't matter. The issue is AMD x3d chips are not only better for gaming than Intel price equivalent, they are about 100w to 200w more efficient in the process. This is causing traditional Intel is better people to completely melt down
Yea your average consumer really prioritizes those things..
They should. Does the average consumer have air conditioning running all year round because they don’t prioritized powers savings? People buy efficient lights all the time what make a computer different lmao
I bought my Intel i5-12600k because it was on a massive sale with an Asus ROG MOBO. It has worked well for me since then. However, if I had to upgrade today I would be switching to team Red.
Intel is ~70% of consumer CPUs. About 60% of LP market. It is plug-and-play for most configurations. Not issues with RAM or memory controllers. Better at Adobe and production applications. But AMD have X3D. Fair enough.
From what I've seen some of those i5 chips are great value for performance. Takes me back but the comments in this thread remind me of when people were shitting bricks because Ivy Lake was so good.
For average users AMD is the better choice. Better efficiency, affordability and overall power usage. On Intel's side these aspects got completely out of hand.
"simple reasons why" *probably proceeds to go through the most convoluted mental gymnastics possible* Edit: went to the blog, 2 out of the 4 reasons are "AMD does actually do this better, but does it really matter?" And the other 2 are outright wrong.
This is hilarious. "The Core i5-13600KF can be seen retailing frequently for under $250, at which point it becomes a more tempting choice compared to the slightly cheaper Ryzen 5 7600X (~$225). This is because these two chips deliver similar gaming performance" So the more expensive chip is better because it's about the same? He does go on to say that the i5 wins in some games, but that also means it ties or loses in other games. Am I the crazy one? "The more expensive chip is a better value because it sometimes beats a cheaper chip" is nonsense to me.
I think it's nonsense not only to you, but to every person with more than 3 working braincells..
Older Intels on sale can be a better buy since they have been so cheap, but I'd pay extra to go from a14th gen k chip to 7800x3d for gaming. The extra performance, and more efficient (cooler/quieter) AMD is worth it.
12400f and 12600kf is a good choice for low budget But for budgets above 1k$? Nah Intel doesn't even exist
>12400f And AMD has its 5600x and its performing around 12% better in Gaming. And in Germany they cost around the same. And for around 160-170€, the 12600kf is around this Price in Germany, you also get a Ryzen 5 7500f and its performing more or less the same and you are on a modern plattform. I know, 32GB DDR5 Ram cost a bit more, but its just around 30-40€ more than 32Gigs of DDR4 In my opinion, i dont know the prices in America, AMD is also the better choise for budget builds
In the US and in most other countries Ryzen 5 5600 is more expensive than a 12400f 12600kf is costing the same as 5600x
in finland, 5600x is 159€ and 12400f is 139€
On PCPartpicker, the 5600X is $155 while the 12400f is $133, it's also not 12% slower .
The average gamer doesn't go to XDA for opinions either. Windows Central and The Verge are other places that have bad takes on PC hardware. They just want an opportunity to inject their affiliate links.
it's click bait indeed. I don't care if AMD is better than Intel or Vice versa. is what I can do with my budget to get the best I can. I live in a third world country So Price/Performance is what I look for.
Well, if an article only states the cons of the other brand while providing no data or stats, its probably being paid.
I just want a processor company with no NSA back doors :(((
Why does most grammar in thread this suck bad so?
The XDA Android hacking & development forums are a national treasure, the media company that sprang up around that... *Not so much*.
I'll change my platform to AMD soon, so i don't have to change my Motherboard every 3 gen
Rage bait lol
Did they completely forget to mention 7800x3d? And 5800x3d? The 7800x3d beats the entire Intel lineup in gaming for like what, $350? While using less than half the power of the Intel chips? I like products from both companies but this article seems like a biased tinfoil Intel shill wrote it?
I am on Team Blue but I will say all these points raised don’t make a lot of sense
Eh. Kinda agree. I think about it this way: If I were to spec a budget build for a family member where I try not to be called for tech support what parts will I choose. I'd probably go with an Intel CPU.
For the average gamer it doesn’t really matter.
As someone who usually buys Intel, nearly every point this guy makes is stupid. With maybe the exception of the Ryzen memory issues. I’ve got one machine that’s unstable and crashes periodically. It’s my only Ryzen machine. It runs a media server on a 7600X and 6000 CL30 memory. I haven’t really had the time to dig into the cause, but maybe I just need to drop the memory down. I doubt I’d see any performance loss running at JDEC speeds.
I prefer intel but not for that reason
Ah yes, the world renowned tech guru Tanveer Singh
I like my 13700k and I got a good deal on it with the mobo. Msi tomahawk. Had everything I wanted at a good price and it preforms just fine with my 3090 in games. And preforms just fine by itself in other apps.
Meanwhile be me and use everything amd+amd (r5 4600h + rx 5600m) in laptop (lent it my brother as he used my old desktop that died) and now in legion go + onexgpu (ryzen z1e + rx7600m egpu) and intel + intel in my desktop (i5-13600k + A770) didn't used nvidia from long time and my last was 2x gtx 960 4gb in SLI + i7-4790k in my dead desktop (mobo died last year pc won't post and tested all i could rams and other cpu psu and shit.) honestly i don't think im going to use Nvidia until they release some good performance card for low price (don't want to sell liver or kidney for gpu) and not some kind of castrate like 4060 with low ram and bandwith that have almost no performance uplift vs previous gen.
I thought UB stood for Ugly Bastard,the internet has ruined me
Idk the prices in the US but in my country the R5-7600 is 200€, the 7600X 210€ and the 13600k is 300€. With the motherboards also being 10-20€ more expensive. At the lower end the 13100 and the 5600(X) are around the same price with Intel motherboards being way more expensive. And in all price ranges you will pay more even if you find the hardware at identical prices because IT LITERALLY NEEDS MORE POWER. Idk which fairy land the author lives but have you seen the electricity costs since COVID alongside the inflation and the wages that remain practically the same? Yeah, it fricking matters.
I would if agreed with this with AM4 from like 2017 to 2021. Never forget the constant bios updates to fix random issues. RAM compatibility with first gen... USB issues introduced around zen2... fTPM stutter that took over a year for them to fix with X570. There was a lot of annoying little things Intel generally didn't deal with. But now AMD has their shit together and is generally the easier recommend.
[удалено]
You're making the mistake many people are making today. You should never call it "an i9" or "an i7". A 9900T is an i9, but is slower than a 14700k that is an i7. AMD's naming scheme is really easy, for gaming you want X3D (bigger number is better), for everything else you also want the bigger number.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are not correct. Depending on your task for example gaming, sometimes i7 with higher clock speed might be better for gaming than more muticore focused i9, even though the i9 will have more total power or benchmark score. So even though generally you would be correct it's still task dependant.
All amd hardware here for years and years now, no issues. No idea what the fuck troll bait is babbling on about over there.
The average gamer just gets a console which all happen to be AMD ......
As someone who's been using AMD since my old Athlon X2 CPU, fuck that person!
According to Steam's hardware survey, most gamers agree. 68% have Intel, 32% have AMD. [Steam Hardware & Software Survey (steampowered.com)](https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey)
Have to say i agree. Last 2 machines were AMD cpus and they both had weird issues with some games. ESPECIALLY the one w AMD gpu. The latest build i went 12600k and 3080 and it hasn’t had any of that weirdness. I can’t entirely just say amd bad intel good, and the AMD pricepoint (esp when you factor in the mainboard) is enticing… but at the end of the day i would say I agree. Less hassle with my intel build for sure.
My last Intel was Pentium II 75MHz... Since then it's just AMD
Not even rage bait. F’n idiot bait more like it. Just wrong and inaccurate.
Cause if your heating doesnt work well intel will help
They're both good. Buy the best bang for the buck
I go where the performance is. I had a 3600x, then 12700k, now a 7800x3D. Couldn't care less about the brand as long as I'm getting solid performance and features.
Might be the guy behind UserBenchmark. This whole article is just "There are so many good reasons for AMD over Intel but those don't matter because reasons"
AMD is cheaper and does what i need it to do. I use AMD. Using Intel feels like using Apple just because it's Apple. I use Samsung for the same reason I use AMD
Only chosen team blue because I heard it was very hard to mount my LF III 360 on amd mount. Novice builder so preferred safer than sorry because I am careless. Maybe would have chosen AM5 if I was on another AIO cooler brand. Next 5-10 years, will probably build with team red if it could maintain current performance against intel.
Nothing says performance and quality like "Average".
Did “the verge” write this?
The other benefit that people don’t often realize about the longer motherboard support of AMD is that it makes motherboards cheaper. Let’s say I am on a budget so I buy a motherboard from when 3000 series came out to go with my 5000 series chip. It’s been out for a while so the price is lower. While for most people this is a fringe benefit, for me at least it’s pretty convenient.
Idk ill always go for the best for the money i spend. If team red is the top i wont go for lower performance but same or higher price thats americans apple brainwash mentality Edit: im sorry folks for throwing facts like that im not trying to insult anyone there taste differs from person to person but im taking care of my money more then choising a women even if the second in long time is more financial damaging xD
1. It's more expensive. 2. It's is not upgradable. 3. It's hotter. 4. It's slower. Good choice
The term "CPU for gaming" is a little off, there is no such thing, you can easly go with i3 for many years and switch GPUs multiple times before you gona get CPU bottlenecked, and usualy gamers change entire rig before that happens.
1, I am a blindly devoted to Intel 2, I get paid by them 3, Had one bad experience 20 years ago with AMD 4, Gf told me to simp for Intel or no sexy time
at least they might be getting paid, this sub simps for AMD for free, even at their own detriment lmao
Isn't XDA focused on mobile devices and software anyway? Maybe they should stick to what they know...
I used to prefer intel when AMDs perf wasnt on par But now it is basically same perf with lot less power and heat And not to forget longer socket support
My 2017 mobo has a 5800x3d in it. Can you get performance like that from a 7 year old Intel platform?
A buddy of mine has an R7 3700x and an RX 5700xt. He can barely play any games without crashing. Not even discord minigames...
My AMD friends always run into more small bugs and issues than our Intel friends. I know y’all don’t want to hear it and will say it’s bullshit but……2 of my 4 amd buddies have already switched to Intel and couldn’t be happier.
"You can spare $50 for a budget CPU cooler. There's no dearth of excellent air coolers capable of taming even the Core i9-14900K. You don't even need a fancy AIO liquid cooler." Talk about the joke of the century; I have to undervolt my 13900k with the assassin 4 for semi decent temps without it trying to take off. And I can tell you it costs a bit more than just $50. I'm still under the impression that 13900k runs cooler than 14900k...