Do you prefer AMD or Intel, and why?

Nice try faggot but I'm only on Jow Forums because I can shitpost during break while I'm home from college. I just got laid Friday night back at uni. Fucked 21 girls in my lifetime and I'm currently leaving 5 hoes on read in Snapchat.

Also fuck anime that shit is gay just like you Chadenberg

I like both, but I like AMD more since it feels more consistent in terms of performance than Intel.

AMD CPU + GPU isn't even a 10% difference on average (both upwards and downwards) on the high end compared to Intel + Nvidia.
So there isn't much to compare, expect price.

Whichever company gives me the best bang for my buck. Right now that's AMD with their Ryzen line. It doesn't help that Intel has pulled all their shady bullshit since Ivy, but eh.

Any sane person will choose Intel because it's faster in games.

>I game
stopped reading right there

AMD is projected to have 30% marketshare of the consumer CPU space next year. They're going to own the datacenter sales for 2 years coming, at least.

Intel is being attacked on multiple fronts now. Qualcomm is releasing their 8CX CPU next year to compete directly with Intel's mobile offerings.

AMD because I don't want a housefire

AMD

>offers fully enabled "True" simultaneous multithreading granting greater multi-thread efficiency on cores

if you set a ryzen chip and an i7 chip on the same core/thread count at the same clocks the Intel chip with have higher single thread performance but the Ryzen chip's multithread will be significantly better. This will be very important because Ryzen 3000 series chips will have the same ore slightly higher IPC as intel with the same 5.0ghz clock threshold meaning not only will ST performance be equal but the MT will scream past Intel.

>Offers this true SMT to most sku's, A Ryzen 2600 gets the same SMT as a 2600X and a 2700X

The simple fact that you get SMT means an i5 chip is worthless now because even though the i5 has higher average fps the minimums are fucking terrible and it stutters. The ryzens have lower ST speed and avg fps but the minimums are up near where an intel i7 is with hyperthreading which means smoother gameplay with lels stuttering.

>all multipliers are unlocked

You can overclock any ryzen chip pretty much on their high X boards and their cheap B-series boards.

This doesnt mean much with low clocked Ryzen 1000-2000 series but the 3000 series on 7nm means that even the shittiest silicon 3000 chip can be paired with a b-series motherboard and clock to 4.4-4.5 ghz and beat a overclocked i5's and match most sku's of i7s while giving you more cores at lower prices.

The R5 2600 has aready destroyed the i5 chips at the budget segment which means only enthusiast buying i7-k chips have a reason to buy intel anymore. What happens when a midrange 8-core R5-3600X at 230$ is equal in performance to the i9-9900K?

AMD, because they support open standards.

I don't have a brand preference. I buy what offers the best bang for the buck.

Never owned an AMD product ever and it will stay that way.

whatever does the job the cheapest

right now it is AMD.
But it used to be Intel.
So it just fucking depends.
But at the moment, nothing beats the $/PERF of the 2600x.

You are a liar lmao. your two 1080tis did NOT pay for themself with mining.

Enjoy your shitty outdated and heavily overpriced chipset.

>2600x
Why X tho?

Not him, but better performance. Though it's up to everyone to decide if that extra 200-300 MHz is worth the $50 that you have to add on top of the price.

Good, stay in your shed intelcuck.

Nah, I just modified my own ARM to fit my own purposes.
Shit flies fast, even got a deal to sell my design.

you sound like an absolute /v/oomer.

>Always Making Duds

The underdog, when the underdog deserve it.
Not buying it gives you years of stagnation.

What's 12 year old life like these days?

I prefer whatever is better option at given time (since money is not an issue). If money was an issue id take mor of a "best bang for money" approach. Its funny how people go on about how apple is better than samsung, how nvidia this and amd that... I have yet to see a company that all its products might be considered better than . There are better products than other products and thats it.

pajeet

AMD, ever since the K6. I despise Intel for the anticompetitive tricks they've been pulling off since forever.

Intel has better manuals.
software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-sdm
Nicer tooling (actually quite impressed with this)
software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-architecture-code-analyzer
And more convenience material
software.intel.com/sites/landingpage/IntrinsicsGuide/
Now maybe this is all just because I'm not familiar with AMDs alternatives because I don't work on them.

If this wasn't a concern and were thinking personal use I'd probably just buy the underdog in market share to a point. They're clearly not different enough that it matters and if one has less R&D they'll effectively limit the R&D input the other has to do. Not to get overly political but that's what antitrust gets you. For all of its benefits and catastrophe mitigation it's not all good.

i don't prefer anything but more money in my wallet
I was ready to buy a X99 platform but exactly then ryzen came out, got the same performance for half the cost(500$ at the time, the same thing costs ~200$ now)

>AMD or Intel, and why?
I just look at all-core performance/price and AMD always wins at all price-points.

>Found the poor fag that can’t freely choose the best
>using a 8700K
why aren't you using a i9-9980XE or a Threadripper 2990WX? are you poor? I'm not using those since I don't really need that much, a Ryzen 2600 is good enough for what I do. It cost about 2/3rds of a comparable Intel chip at the time so it made total sense.

>If company A offers a 5ghz 8 core processor at $100 and company B offers a 5ghz 8 core processor at $110, I'm gonna go with company A
Sounds about right, given that IPC and everything else is equal. It's usually not which makes it slightly harder.

>Intel because it's faster in games.
Is it? If you can pay slightly more than half the price of a comparable Intel product for a Ryzen, and that's where the prices are at right now, then you've got enough money to go from a 1060 to a 1070 which is obviously going to give you a noticeable performance increase. That Intel CPUs are faster in games is basically a myth anyway, we're talking 3-4 fps difference on a 2080ti (which the vast majority doens't buy anyway).

This, buying Intel simply doesn't feel right.

>9800X
>fixed hardware level giving back the performance lost before

Attached: shillplsgo.gif (240x184, 440K)

Ryzen right now, because it's better in nearly every way.
I prefer the one who is currently better. I've never fanboyed. I never recommended or bought one bulldozer when they were out. I had athlon and a pentium back in the day. Athlon still runs, it's been about 17 years.
As that computer has aged, I've probably went through about 8 different intel chips. All were fine. Ryzen came out and I got the 1700X
people who have brand loyalty are only scamming themselves. The companies don't give a fuck about you. Same as republicans & democrats. Neither gives a fuck about you. Vote for who agrees with what you believe.

I ran a Q6600 for 8 months without thermal paste, including a hot summer. I forgot to put it on. Based Intel just kept on trucking.

Don't prefer any - I buy whatever suits my usecase at the time of purchase.

This year I went from a i5-4690k to a ryzen 2700x because I wanted the higher threadcount for virtual machines that I use for homelab related to my work - as well as some server applications.

>Athlon still runs, it's been about 17 years.
lucky you. I had mine perhaps 3 years and one day I heard a noise from my box and smoke started emanating from it. Turns out a capacitor on the motherboard had blown (which wasn't oncommon on motherboards for both AMD and Intel at the time).

Looking back.. that's actually the only time I've had a motherboard just fail. HDDs on the other hand.. I've had countless failures over the years, some after months and some after decade.

Intel. AMD only has shit on the used market, and Intel has proven longevity.

If I had the money to buy new I'd still buy Intel since they have the best price/performance.

9700k build:
pcpartpicker.com/list/W9MqyX

2700X build:
pcpartpicker.com/list/tzD6Ft

This is biased WAAAAAY in AMD's favor since there's no storage, video card, OS, or even case. This comparison would be between the two just running headless in a cardboard box off a $5 used 500GB drive

The AMD is 81.3% of the cost.

anandtech.com/bench/product/2125?vs=2258

HEVC encoding:
i7 9700k: 196
2700X: 153

So even with a best case parts list you're paying 81.3% of the price for only 78% the performance.
That goes downhill in a hurry if we actually finish the builds, since the price percentage narrows while the performance stays equal.

Attached: speccy.png (3961x1053, 409K)

There is literally 0 reason to buy overpriced monolith CPUs.

hey look its the poorfag pajeet shill

>Intel has proven longevity
>lying on the internet

>shill
Check yourself, AMDrone. Intel hasn't seen a penny of my money since a PIII 900 laptop I bought in 2001; AMD hasn't seen a penny since an X2 5200+ purchased in 2006; Nvidia hasn't seen any since an 320MB 8800 GTS in early 2007; and AMD's GPU division has never seen a dime.

I simply go around buying what's the best price/performance, and I don't give a damn about your stupid game of investing your entire identity into a corporate brand.

I don't make the CPUs. I don't set the prices. I don't do the QC. Don't blame me that a sober analysis shows Intel coming out on top.
If you don't like the outcome, petition AMD to reduce their prices. That would shift the conclusion.

>Not having a 300Hz display with quad RTX Titans
sad

both companies are shit

What's with the epeen competion? If you can afford Intel housefires and the industrial chiller to cool that shit go right ahead. For anyone else who cares about performance per dollar value, right now there is only AMD.

whichever is better.
as of today it is clearly AMD+nvidia (because opencl is shit compared to nvidia)

>For anyone else who cares about performance per dollar value, right now there is only AMD.
Nope. See:

>uses shill vocabulary
>tries to say he isnt
ur just a poorfag pajeet go away and stop shilling

>that's actually the only time I've had a motherboard just fail
I've only seen one mobo failure as well. I had an AM3+ board that I gifted to my younger brother when I was done. He bought some more parts and got a usable system out of it with the help of his friends. Then he started complaining about system crashes under load. So the next tome I visited my parents, I helped troubleshoot it. Turns out the NB voltage had been upped to insane levels by his "tech savvy" friends. Resetting them didn't help, as the damage was done. Changed RAM, GPU, CPU, PSU, nothing helped.

In my cockiness, I had promised him a new PC if I couldn't fix the old one. So, given that I didn't have a spare mobo around, I built him a new AM4 system and told him not to let his friends touch the UEFI under any circumstances.

Post desktop and Speccy.

amd is for poor people

Umad pajeet?

>post one benchmark that heavily favors your argument
>ignore dozens of others where the performance is similar or better
I don't think you're going to convince anyone with this.

Intel is overpriced as shit, and they keep doing everything to fuck over their customers, so no thanks.

Attached: 2f4ca16994935220067f162ceb0838f8a4a2c85937e910fb1a79d026226f78a6.gif (320x320, 2.44M)

Intel because I only buy laptops.

If I were to win the lottery and decided to build a VR PC to use twice I'd go with AMD just because the giant Ryzen processors look cool.

Seems like you're the pajeet. I've noticed AMDrones can never go off script, exactly as if your shilling is being monitored for corporate compliance.

>user with 52 cores
>WHY ARE YOU COMPARING ENCODING SPEEDS?

>trying this hard

>trying THIS hard

SAD

Attached: 4L_AF7PSckU.jpg (2290x1322, 472K)

Intard logic in 2018 (will 2019 be any different?)

>Multi-core doesn't matter!
>Productivity doesn't matter!
>Price/performance doesn't matter!
>Performance per watt doesn't matter!
>Power usage doesn't matter!
>Temperatures don't matter!
>Soldered dies don't matter!
>Stutters don't matter!
>Streaming doesn't matter!
>Data centers don't matter!
>Locked CPUs don't matter!
>OEMs don't matter!
>Hyperscalers don't matter!
>Upgradeability doesn't matter!
>Anti-competitive business practices don't matter!
>Locked platform features don't matter!
>Synthetic loads don't matter!
>PCI-e lanes don't matter!
>Burnt pins don't matter!
>Heat doesn't matter!
>1771w cooler doesn't matter!
>Server space doesn't matter!
>ECC support doesn't matter!
>Free RAID doesn't matter!
>NVMe RAID doesn't matter!
>StoreMI doesn't matter!
>IPC doesn't matter!
>7nm doesn't matter!
>StoreMI doesn't matter!
>HEDT doesn't matter!
>Stock coolers don't matter!
>Security doesn't matter!
>Games don't always matter!
>Enterprise doesn't matter!
>Hyperthreading doesn't matter!
>VMware doesn't matter!
>MySQL doesn't matter!
>Unix doesn't matter!
>Linux doesn't matter!
>Waffer yields don't matter!
>Benchmarks after full patches don't matter!
>Asian markets don't matter!
>Own fabrics don't matter!
>Chipset lithography doesn't matter!
>Cray doesn't matter!
>Cisco doesn't matter!
>HPE doesn't matter!
>AZURE doesn't matter!
>5nm doesn't matter!
>TDP doens't matter!
>10nm doesn't always matter!
>Cache doesn't matter!
>Integrated graphics doesn't matter!
>PCI-Express 4.0 doesn't matter!

Attached: 1544667387109.png (813x1402, 324K)

Yes. Is video encoding all you do? If so, sure. Otherwise you'll look at the very same benchmark aggregator you linked and quickly see that 2700X is only slightly behind in most applications and in some even outright beats the i7. If you had actually tried to make a fair comparison you'd have quoted other slightly less cherrypicked benchmark examples and built an argument on that. Instead you chose that one and directly equated that to i7 9600k being 22% better across the board. If you're not a shill, then you're every bit as dishonest as one.

>11 machines
>52 cores
>Is encoding all you do?

No, I also play 11 simultaneous games of Doom 2, but I just couldn't find a benchmark for that.

AMD is the better company with a good overall product, but Intel has the stronger product for gaming.
I haven't upgraded my i5 3570k for 6 years now, and am looking forward to potentially upgrading to Zen 2.

>Hey Faggots,
>My name is John, and I hate every single one of you. All of you are fat, retarded, no-lifes who spend every second of their day looking at stupid ass pictures. You are everything bad in the world. Honestly, have any of you ever gotten any pussy? I mean, I guess it's fun making fun of people because of your own insecurities, but you all take to a whole new level. This is even worse than jerking off to pictures on facebook.
Don't be a stranger. Just hit me with your best shot. I'm pretty much perfect. I was captain of the football team, and starter on my basketball team. What sports do you play, other than "jack off to naked drawn Japanese people"? I also get straight A's, and have a banging hot girlfriend (She just blew me; Shit was SO cash). You are all faggots who should just kill yourselves. Thanks for listening.
>Pic Related: It's me and my bitch

Attached: bb2.jpg (242x251, 12K)

epic fail

AMD because Intel is anti consumer AF

I dont prefer either. I prefer whats the best value for my money without losing too much performance. It just happens that AMD Ryzen is a much better value proposition in current line up.

this, but if you ok with 10% less performance,you save 1000$.
So if your PC is the most important thing in the word, go with Intel + Nvidia.

The fuck? I suppose that differs on where you live then. Fuckers are asking 70 euros more for the last 3 generation old Intel in stock compared to the newer AMD one with the same performance.

Amd. Intel is anti competitive and have ruined the market