Why you should consider AMD's RYZEN CPU for your next build - PART 2

[M1nt-l0u 1,235]

Let's first look at this graph:

It shows that Intel had no competition for the last 5+ years or so. No reason to make massive improvements as there was no competition. 

If you have an intel CPU. Do not upgrade to anything between 3rd and 7th gen. 8th gen is where to go for actual improvement for your money. Alternatively, if you're looking to build on a budget then I highly recommend buying a used intel CPU around the 3rd or 4th gen area. It's cheaper and basically the same as 7th gen.

There was an obvious catalyst for the 37% performance increase:

Intel released 2 generations of CPUs in the same year. AMD Ryzen came along and kicked the market. Intel then actually DID SOMETHING. This is excellent news for us consumers. AMD's tactic is to be the cheap underdog for enthusiasts. On a side note they are actually beginning to get back into the enterprise market.

(Below pic of one of last year's server showcases, the server grade stuff is named EPYC as a competitor to Intel's Xeon lineup)

They are even coming back to laptops.

This is actually Uuugee  for AMD. When is the last time you saw legitimate competition from AMD in the mobile market? Arguably never, AMDs older mobile CPUs have been notorious for mega battery consumption and heat output. This is changing now... 

I'm not an AMD fanboy. But I am a person who always builds computers with price to performance being the most important factor in my considerations. If you are also like me, then AMD should be your next choice for a CPU.

Real world - 

AMD Ryzen 5 1600x  ~£170

Intel Core i5-7500 ~£170

(Amazon prices as of right this now.)

CineBench is a software that utilises all cores to render a 3d image. Ryzen has 8 cores, so can make use of them all. 

The gaming results are often quite even, often a tit-for-tat scenario. Intel's single core performance is often better than AMD's but the future holds better optimisation for AMDs CPUs to efficiently utilise all of their cores. Many games are limited to what they can use. 

TL:DR, the future just gets better for AMD. If you buy one today, software updates and developer optimisation will allow AMD to thrive in the future, as it already does when it is capable of using all the cores available.  A popular analogy I've seen over the internet is: Intel is 10% better for gaming, but Ryzen is 40% better for everything else.

 

Edited March 17, 2018 by Mintlou

[Kai 840]

intels better

[GingerPopper 402]

AMD imo have always had better budget and mid range options, but when it comes to higher end pc's intel is undoubtfully better, hope AMD start focusing more on the higher end consumers so they can become real contenders to intel all around. Also game performance varies alot, some games favor intel cpus, some games favor AMD cpus, some games favor nvidia gpus and some AMD. Most of these games have better support for intel and nvidia (because they have more money to toss at developers for them to focus on their hardware).

All of this talk is about games though, in terms of all around chips AMD is definitely better, only intel's i7-8700k and i5-8600k have actually showed noticable improvements from previous generations in terms of all around performance (because AMD released the ryzen 1600x and 1700x and intel shat themselves). At the end of the day just stick with what you want, if you only game intel will provide you with slightly better performance for the same money, but if you are into productivity you could consider an AMD chip.

[YoungGerald 170]

got the ryzen 5 1600x (got it in a really good deal otherwise i would of got a cheaper model and overclocked) and i must say its better than any other intel cpu i've ever owned.