AMD vs Intel for gaming
Posted by Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit | buildapc | View on Reddit | 118 comments
I’m building a gaming PC, and I don’t know which processor brand is better. AMD has X3D chips that have a 3D V-Cache, which is a boost for gaming performance, but Intel often has more cores and threads and higher clock speeds.
I really don’t know which brand to choose, nor which brand is better in price to performance.
Noelan_@reddit
AMD on top
PrizeAd3194@reddit
heck yeah brother
dabocx@reddit
For gaming it’s AMD right now.
The more important question is what your budget is
Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit (OP)
Hey. Sorry for the late response, but my budget is $1,800
dabocx@reddit
I actually just built this for a friend. If you have a microcenter near by or shop around you can probably get these prices lower since this is right up to the top of your budget.
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Txzggn
lmaoursad_@reddit
by the way, can i ask how that pc's been doing for your friend? i'm looking to start slowly buying parts for my first pc but don't really know a ton, or have anyone to help me.
dabocx@reddit
He loves it, plays marathon , arc and total war mostly and it easily knocks those down easily.
Problem is that build is 600 dollars more now than it was when I posted it.
Are you near a micro center? The deals for the cpu bundle are the main thing that can really save money
lmaoursad_@reddit
i'm just over an hour drive from the closest one from what i can find. and wow $600 more in half a year lol that's crazy. i'm still saving tho, so even if i get parts a bit cheaper in person i won't have enough money for 3~ months. and that's if i don't spend any money.
lmaoursad_@reddit
bro i always forget that USD is the default, i switch it to Canadian $ and the price when up a grand😞
UserUserDontGetOld@reddit
These years AMD makes just better CPUs overall: raw gaming performance, price/performance ratio. It happens sometimes that the former underdog gets to the top.
But Intels are great as well. It's not like you're gonna be able to play with Intel, no. More likely you'll get a little less performance (highly depending on game, some will prefer Intel) or spend about hundred dollars more, or have to gey better cooling, or have more expensive motherboard... But the differences in performance will be negligible in the same price range.
If you're into some specific game and you absolutely need to know, will you have, say, 120 or 129 fps, you can search for performance test videos for that game. There's a lot of them.
If you're a general gamer-for-fun, just ignore the CPU, as GPU will define most of the performance.
karmapopsicle@reddit
Not really. Retail pricing adjust fairly quickly to correct this kind of stuff. Note that the data in the linked review is using pricing data from November 2024 when it was published, so there have been some noticeable shifts.
Things are generally pretty consistent over time though. Newer, higher end chips pretty much inevitably offer substantially worse performance/$ than older/budget chips. The 9800X3D ($470) has an absolutely terrible price/performance ratio, because it's the 'top dog' and AMD can easily demand a significant premium for it - you're literally paying more than twice the $ per frame compared to something like a 9600X ($200), or even an Ultra 7 265K ($260).
AMD's dominance caused Intel's consumer sales to crater (in terms of CPUs sold to builders, because they're still milking tons of contracts with OEMs), so retail pricing on those parts has dropped significantly to accomodate. That $260 Ultra 7 265K launched at $395, which even then was still able to offer marginally better $ per frame vs the 9800X3D. At $260 it's in the same value realm as the 9600X. And that's before the various microcode and scheduler fixes were implemented, though those generally delivered fairly marginal performance uplifts.
Ragnogrimmus@reddit
Right however how I would only slightly disagree with the 9800X3d it has the perfect core count with 8 cores and 16 threads. Its powerful enough for most content creators and its 8 core 16 thread count with tons of L3 cache has been a game changer.
1 of the reasons pricing is apparently going to be affecting things is data center memory buyouts. HBM3 is more expensive than my house... well some houses. And the manufacturing bleed out from high performance memory is going to affect GPU prices in the near term until they can catch up with demand. Not so sure on the CPU side, but system pricing will get more expensive because supply is constrained in the memory area.
Ragnogrimmus@reddit
Which brings me too this notion. If you buy an AMD 9800X3D that cpu should last you 10 years. Unless something dramatically changes both Intels next CPUS That offer there own large pool of l3 cache, what would make you upgrade? I have the 14700K and it runs hot and AMD would be slightly better but I am not shelling out the cash for a new board and memory because the 14700k is sleeping through most applications. I guess my point is for the consumer market these chips are already more than needed. AMD made the smarter play by focusing on cache and lower thermals. As a 14700k owner other than the heat those cpus produce there is little reason to upgrade.
Tell me why I am wrong?
Beneficial_Jump_3898@reddit
I wondered are there brands, who dedicate one series of their laptops to GPU only maker? I know that Dream Machines does it with their series RT laptops on AMD and RG - only on intel. Cuz in my opinion if we have amd, who has been taking over intel lately, then there should a choice to get a laptop on AMD
Southern_Clue4504@reddit
Processor?: AMD. GPU?: AMD.
Will you be using Windows 11?: Stick with Intel then; Microsoft hates AMD and Windows 11 proves it.
Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit (OP)
I have a PC with a 4060 Ti and a 9700X and it runs Windows 11 just fine.
Southern_Clue4504@reddit
I have a Ryzen 5 7520U, a Ryzen 7 3700X, and a Threadripper 2990WX. Windows 11 performs worse than Windows 10 in many non-gaming tasks on these (just look at the disappointing data write/read performance, or how it detects the manufacturer's own drivers as malware and won't allow them to be installed).
On the other hand, I have an i5 1135G7, an i7 7700K, and two E5 V4 Xeons (specifically the 2640 and 2690), which make my AMD processors look ridiculous 🥺
Downtown-Regret8161@reddit
For gaming an X3D CPU is currently unmatched because it uses so little power and delivers top tier gaming performance. Also: clockspeeds do not matter as much as other specs on the CPU. Games do not profit from extra cores and threads as much as productivity software. In that case there are also AMD CPUs with higher core count, but the x3d variants are very expensive.
Knowing your budget would also be helpful.
Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit (OP)
Budget is $1,800
Downtown-Regret8161@reddit
With this budget you're going to want a 7800x3d/9800x3d and pair it with a 9070xt or 5070ti.
Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit (OP)
Ok, thanks
ValtaTV@reddit
Only cpus worth buying for gaming rigs are x3d cpus.
immortalis88@reddit
If it’s just for gaming and a tiny bit of productivity tasks for work, AMD all day (specifically the Ryzen 7 9800X3D).
If you do more work/film, photo or music editing with a tiny bit of gaming, then Intel with more cores.
lichtspieler@reddit
PUGET Photoshop benchmark ranks the 9800x3D higher as Intels offerings and HIGHER as AMDs 9950x.
Video editing is CPU+GPU mixed workload and for sure not the highlight when it comes to high core count CPU impact for the job duration.
With AM5 and the 9000 series CPUs, there is a latency advantage compared to Intel system, so I would not claim that Intel is better for audio DAWs.
My systems (9800x3D + NVIDIA) latency for AUDIO https://i.imgur.com/jgl9iuz.png
adnansz@reddit
It depends on the budget, for example, I will assemble a setup with an i5 14400f which is €130, the AMD equivalent which is the Ryzen 5800x is €150, the latter is inferior. So I will pay for less for performance.
bonecleaver_games@reddit
Yeah, the 245k is absolutely a better buy than the 9700x. Intel also has better memory controllers.
ye1l@reddit
Where I live even the 265K costs like 30% less than a 9700x, it has an incredible price to performance right now. It's harder to recommend since it's a "dead" socket with no upgrade path, but if you think you're gonna keep the same PC for like 4 years without upgrading, definitely look into intels prices. They're much more competitive now in terms of price to performance than at launch, often outright beating AMD for budget and midrange builds.
bonecleaver_games@reddit
Where I'm at the 9700x and 265k cost about the same. And yeah, I could easily see myself going four years without upgrading. Computer shit is expensive where I live and wages kinda suck.
Sillybrownwolf@reddit
AMD is far superior right now, the "more core" is actually E cores which doesn't help much in gaming, the P core is the main workforce and it's basically has the same amount of P cores as the AMD counterpart
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
In gaming, not productivity and not regarding the value.
But in gaming yes.
Sillybrownwolf@reddit
Amd CPUs also runs well in productivity as long as it doesn't need that special intel iGPU encoder, the 9950x3d is a perfect example.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Yeah they are good, but not a great value, at least here where I live. The 9950x3D is like 650€, the ultra 7 265kf costs only 279€ and the Ultra 9 265K is "only" 530€. That's like 120€ plus. The 9950x is with 520€ near the ultra 9. So the ultra 7 for productivity and gaming is just a steal. The 7800x3D is available for 350 and the 9800x3D for 450€.
DaEccentric@reddit
We'll shill for Intel when they deliver a decent product that doesn't either underperform like mad or self-destruct.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Naw AMD fans will never stop.
Regarding your comment: the ultras are decent, they are neither prone to get the instability problem nor are they bad. They perform very well in gaming and even better in productivity while being much cheaper than AMDs CPUs.
The mainboard aspect is the biggest disadvantage but I think keeping a CPU long-term will increase the probability that you'll upgrade the mainboard and ram anyway.
The instability is from my knowledge gone and AMD has had some problems lately. Of course this was no big deal...
hydrovids@reddit
I’m not an “amd fan.” Its just that amd is doing GAMING better than intel rn, which is what the post is about. Intel also has worse frametimes and worse hitching issues in games, when 9800x3d and 9950x3d do not.
My productivity build is intel, fyi. But for gaming, ALL DAY its amd, like objectively
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
I also never meant you.
hydrovids@reddit
Nobody is sayinh that intel is bad, brother. We’re saying that in recent years, its just not worth its price point.
Also, sorry to hear that amd is expensive in your country. That genuinely sucks to hear
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Not in this comment section, true, but the flame on intel is massive. All I wanted to point out: intels new CPUs can actually be a valid choice if you focus on value and good allrounders. That's all.
I could buy myself an intel for much less than an AMD here and while it might lack the gaming performance, which becomes neglectable with higher resolution, it's very good as a workstation CPU.
That's all.
lordhooha@reddit
As an IT professional amd work so much better in an office setting. Intel has been on a downward slide for a min. Their server processors even make server updates and migrations far quicker. I try to push people to AMD for most applications.
Gaming they’ve been dominating for literally a decade easy.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
AMD is definitely not dominating gaming since a decade. AMD became competitive before but it's dominating intel around 2019 or so. Intel lost the crowns like 2021 roughly. And I don't talk about server CPUs, I have also mentioned that AMD is superior even in high core count cpus. It's funny cause everything positive I say about AMD still gets attacked. That's how AMD gets defended, even if they don't get attacked.
Where I live intel is quite an amount cheaper, while offering better all-round performance than similar AMD CPUs. That's what I said. AMDs old CPUs get quite expensive cause they are so hyped for gaming and Intel's get cheaper and cheaper.
zagblorg@reddit
Plenty of people who are recommending AMD aren't "AMD fans". Being a fan of a corporate brand is dumb! I've had multiple AMD and Intel CPUs over the last 30 years, and try to choose based on who provides the best value at my price point at the time.
Right now, for gaming at least, it's AMD. My previous 2 PCs were Intel.
As for the upgrade thing, going from a 2600 to a 5600X without needing to buy RAM and motherboard was a great upgrade. But you are obviously free to choose for yourself.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
I'm not talking about the people recommending AMD, I talk about the people promoting AMD. The YouTube shorts with meme pictures and the frame rate counters with "dope emojis" to show how badass AMD is. Also the flames in posts that sound like pure bait.
And yes I also think it's about value. If you really focus on gaming and if you have a bit more money, go for AMD, clear choice.
If you want a good and cheap allrounder, intel is also a good choice and you won't lack too much gaming performance, depending on the game and settings.
AMD actually also beats intel in the Threadripper segment.
The only place intel still wins is max OC Performance, from my perspective a sad development and intel made mistakes, but a lot of hate is actually over exaggerated.
DaEccentric@reddit
How are you claiming that the Ultras perform "very well" in gaming when even the 285K is middling at best? They perform worse than Raptor Lake, and are even beat by the 5600X3D in some cases.
What issues did AMD have? I haven't heard of anything.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
What benchmarks did you check out and you know that Intel got a performance boost update? The CPU is also one of the least important bottlenecks, the GPU is way more important, especially with higher resolution. So a CPU performing great is overall overinterpretation in most scenarios. Anyway I would like to see your sources.
Search for AMD - ASRock issues. AMD claimed ASRock made the mistake, ASRock denied it and I think while it was actually mainly an ASRock problem, it still happened on other boards but less frequent.
DaEccentric@reddit
GamersNexus CPU Comparisons
Feel free to check them out. LTT's benchmarks are pretty consistent with these results. The article's dated to November '24. The April performance boost manage to eke out an extra 7% according to what I've seen, which is still not enough to overturn these results by any significant margin.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Well thank you, but it's a bit outdated, especially since Intel got a free performance boost. We talk about ram up to 8000+ MHz and free OC tuning to gain extra percentages. But let's assume that's no real thing because we maybe talk about 5-10% extra performance. First there is only one game, Baldurs Gate at 1080p which is better because it utilises the CPU more, but it's not really representative overall. The second strange thing: the 14900K which is actually a very powerful CPU in gaming (not as powerful as AMDs top notch CPUs, but still very strong), and pretty close to the 7800x3D falls strangely behind, if I'm not mistaken it's sometimes even better than the 7800x3D while being much more expensive obviously. If I search for more benchmarks in more games I get very different results, also when I check videos and comparisons. Anyway let's assume we only have this piece of information... Then we still see the ultra series in the upper midfield or top field. The ultra 9 should have way better values nowadays but the 7 is the great value CPU and it should perform comparable to the 5700x3D which is actually a very decent performance at 1080p. What's the performance uplift here, if it is CPU demanding 10-25% based on the game? Well here comes the important point, that's a big factor. I could take multiple sources, but I found actually one of gamersnexus and if you scroll through the games, you get a better view on the ranked CPUs and in many games they perform even better. https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-265k-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-285k-245k-7800x3d-7900x-more So let's break that down, you get a CPU, that's maybe 20 percent worse in gaming, 75 bucks cheaper but vice versa 20% better in productivity while being newer and supporting faster ram and overall it's easy to cool and not massively less efficient than the 7800x3D.
And all of the gaming performance is less important if you play on 1440p or 4K anyway.
For me the intel sounds like a decent option and it's by far not a bad cpu.
zexton@reddit
depends on the gpu and games you are using,
4k with dlss quality will still see so many cpu bottlenecks on a 9800x3d with a 4090 in the right games,
dont even need to be modern games,
brute forcing cpu hardware is the only way to gain framerate in most rts games, path of exile 1-2 etc where a lot units clash together
bf6 beta, for that matter
raytracing and path tracing also use cpu power, so we have to take that into consideration,
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Yes true, but mostly it's still the GPU bottleneck, not the CPU. And we have to take into account what people buy. If you can afford a 4090 or 5090 you can afford the best cpu possible. All I'm saying is: the intel CPUs can be very good value CPUs depending on the location and if you find yourself in the situation getting a 5070, 5070 ti and you want to get good value CPU also for productivity they are great options. Intel is in a better position than a year ago. The gaming performance is decent and the GPU is the key factor. There is no need to skip intel permanently just because of bad promo and the most bad promo comes from AMD fans nowadays. Many reviews on intel are better now. If you focus completely on gaming you are surely better with going for AMD, a clear winning point for AMD, but if you want a good value allrounder, intel is not a bad choice.
hydrovids@reddit
Amd is NOT more expensive than intel lol, at least in terms of price to performance. The 9950x3d is $699 and is 35% faster in games than any cpu intel has ever put out.
The 9800x3d is $479, and is 36% faster than any cpu intel has put out in gaming. The best intel cpus are $500+ rn
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
I said where I live. AMD is incredibly expensive here.
Sillybrownwolf@reddit
They fucked up their launch price which was around $400 at the time also for extra $150± you get more threads and core and also a CPU that can game I'd gladly pay for it.
Whats funny is it's cheaper to get AM5 in the long run too as Intel already abandoned the lga 1851, meaning you have to buy a whole new motherboard for the next core ultra
_dekoorc@reddit
It depends. Both the 265K and LGA 1851 motherboards are cheaper than similar AM5 chips/mobos. Assuming you're using a like-for-like motherboard (like, the MSI MAG B850M MORTAR and MSI MAG B860M MORTAR), a Core 7 265k system is $243.83 cheaper than a 9800X3D system. The 265k is $93.83 cheaper than the 9700x. (There's maybe a little savings lost since the Intel's can (and should) be outfitted with faster member than AM5, but that should hopefully be re-usable.
The 265k is definitely not as fast as the 9800X3D in most games, but, unless tariffs completely f motherboard market, you'll be able to get a AM6 or LGA xxxx board in the future
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
The first abstract is a bit unclear, could you explain further?
Well the upgrade thing is an aspect. But I actually don't know if it's really that important. I have read multiple times, that most people upgrade the mainboard anyway after a long time pc.
And I actually don't know many people buying frequently and upgrading frequently. Most I know buy a CPU and GPU and keep them for years.
Jbarney3699@reddit
Issue is Intel products aren’t reliable. We still don’t have enough data to prove the kinks are gone. I would rather pay more for AMD products with much more proven reliability than Intel atm. So, buying into 13th and 14th gen is still a risk. Is buying an unreliable car for cheaper than a reliable one “better value”? For me, no.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
Okay so first you would probably buy the ultra anyway. These CPUs have great value, are easy to cool as I have heard and even though they have a higher max TDP they run efficiently.
The thing about the 13th and 14th gen is from my knowledge more an emotional thing right now. As far as I know it got fixed with updates and a bios upgrade.
But you still get a 2 year extra warranty so there shouldn't be a big problem, you will get 5 years of update warranty that's kinda impressive.
So I don't see any problem buying an intel. I actually see many pros buying an ultra 7 for example.
Jbarney3699@reddit
People have different measures of value. Risky purchases with chips that may or may not fail in 13th and 14th gen is not ‘good value’ to me personally.
Designer-Fan3826@reddit
More cores and threads do not translate to better gaming more cores generally slows down gaming performance,amd ryzen 7 7800 x3d best gaming cpu in the market dollar for performance,if you want bragging rights,go for the 9800 x3d but you gain in minimal for the extra $120
someoneirrelevant17@reddit
Imagine thinking owning an AMD product is bragging rights lmao. What a joke.
Sillybrownwolf@reddit
As an intel owner I regretted buying this crap
Stylaluna@reddit
7600X3D >>> 7800X3D if you're just going for performance / price
bubken99@reddit
AMD easily clears from a pure pc building standpoint the 9600x and 9700x are the best value imo, but the older intel chips that cost like 100-150 dollars are fire for smaller pc projects like emulation machines
SpudmasterBob@reddit
I bought a PC with an Intel 13900ks about a year and a half ago before the bios problems were all worked out, and despite a ton of tweaks to stabilize it, I finally have to replace my processor and MB because the frequency of the crashes kept increasing.
Went with an AMD 9800 X3D just because of how bad of an experience I had with the Intel chip. With the bios all good, more than likely the Intel chips would be good now, but pretty sure my processor had degraded with the early overvoltage/heat issues. Looking forward to seeing how it runs once the local custom build shop gets it back to me.
Luuk341@reddit
As the others say. AMD's X3D chips have absolutely murdered Intel's closest chips.
Price per performance, they are king. Parity performance, they are king.
And they have relatively low powerdraw to boot.
For gaming I can only recommend AMD.
No_Matter_3647@reddit
Have a 285K and 9800X3D and 5090's. Game at 4k, Can't tell the difference between the 2 in games, but since I actually do other work on my computer..........the 285K smokes the AMD "great" gaming chip, so instead of having a one trick pony, the 285K is my main system that makes zero compromises.
syunz@reddit
You'll get the same performance with a ryzen 5600 or i5 12400 at 4k. Why don't you just get that, I'll trade my system for yours. Also maybe you should give csgo a try and see the diff between the 9800x3d and 285k.
There's a reason why cpu testing is done at 1080p, and/or when there's not a gpu bottleneck.
No_Matter_3647@reddit
Why the fuck would i play at poverty spec 1080?
Tell me how does a 12400 or 5600x do for rendering and video editing? Give you fucking head a shake and take Amd's c@ck out of your mouth
buildapc-ModTeam@reddit
Hello, your comment has been removed. Please note the following from our subreddit rules:
Rule 1 : Be respectful to others
^(Click here to message the moderators if you have any questions or concerns)
syunz@reddit
I never said amd was better at intel for rendering and video editing. But what percentage of people buying these chips actually do that.
If you're argument is that intel is better at AMD in both rendering AND gaming that's false. And you don't have to play at 1080p, why don't you try comparing your 285k and 9800x3d in cs2 at 4k?
Effective_Argument_9@reddit
i used to think Intel was the best. my thinking changed once i moved to AMD 5800x3d many many years ago.
karmapopsicle@reddit
Many many years meaning... 3? Assuming you bought quickly after launch.
FurioGiunta2000@reddit
Intel 14600K is cheapest cpu for serious gaming
karmapopsicle@reddit
Definitely a pretty fantastic value at $150USD right now.
Sleddoggamer@reddit
I believe the quick way to sum it up is that Intel cores excel at productivity. AMD's cache excels at gaming
The deciding factor that people who know much better than I usually highlight is price since some Intel components can he found cheaper, but since parts stay interchangeable longer with AMD, I very frequently see gaming build options at the same price range with AMD either so close it doesn't matter or actually gives better gaming-specific performance
Aristotelaras@reddit
it depends on your budget and how often you are going to upgrade.
Alarming-Elevator382@reddit
The 9800X3D is the best gaming CPU on the market but honestly any modern AMD or Intel CPU will likely be more than good enough for every game on the market. Maybe if you're running a 5090 or doing high-frame rate stuff, the difference might matter, but for most games any contemporary CPU will be plenty good.
WildPal87@reddit
Pick an AM5 mobo and you can upgrade later. Pick a 1851 and...you need a frame...
BigDaddyTrumpy@reddit
Best value chip is 265K. Also comes with free Battlefield 6 which is a $60 game that almost everyone wants. Making the CPU dirt cheap.
THEYoungDuh@reddit
AMD has the same frequency as Intel both can hit ~5.5 stock.
Intel has more slower cores.
AMD beats Intel by a significant margin for gaming right now and it doesn't look like that will end anytime soon
IGunClover@reddit
Definitely AMD since latest Intel is a dead platform. Amd is still supported for another 2 years.
xenocea@reddit
The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is an easy recommendation with very few caveats. It's fair to say this new Ryzen chip has cemented itself as the best all-around processor for those seeking ultimate performance for both work and play. If productivity is your primary focus, the 9950X3D is likely the best option
In workloads like Cinebench, the 9950X3D and Intel's 285K were neck and neck, with the Ryzen processor consuming just over 10% less power. In general, they should be highly competitive for productivity tasks, but as always, it's best to research specific application performance based on your workflow.
Where Intel falls behind significantly is in gaming. Here, the 9950X3D delivered, on average, 35% more performance.
https://www.techspot.com/review/2965-amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d/
Brawndo_or_Water@reddit
The difference is pretty minimal in 1440P and non-existent in 4K. Nobody pairs a 9950x3d or 285k to a 1080 Monitor and cheapo GPU.
MarxistMan13@reddit
Plenty of people do exactly this. Esports gamers don't need much GPU, since they're often only interested in FPS at 1080p Low.
I have my 9800X3D running with a 6800XT at 1440p right now, and the CPU is still my limitation in a majority of games. I don't play anything particularly demanding on GPU horsepower.
xenocea@reddit
At 4k yes, but there’s still a sizable difference at 1440p. The point is, the OP asked which brand has the better processor for gaming, and right now it’s AMD.
Yommination@reddit
Any 9000x3d chip takes a dump on the best Intel chip in gaming
nesnalica@reddit
AMD has X3D cache, more cores and higher clockspeeds in their top models compared to intel.
also higher clockspeed doesnt mean higher performance.
it is about IPC (instructions per clock) in which AMDs highest end CPUs are also better.
to keep it simple if money is no issue then get a 9800x3D or 7800x3D
Ninjaguard22@reddit
Why even ask this on reddit? You will only get one answer and opinion.
Melliodass@reddit
AMD for gaming!
Grand-Equivalent-662@reddit (OP)
I’ve seen you guys wanting to know my budget.
$1,800
gargamel314@reddit
Intel prob has good deals right now, they are pretty desperate. Ya AMD has the best performance these days if you want the bleeding edge of gaming performance, but seriously, just shop good deals, the GPU choice matters much more for gaming than the CPU.
Throwawaymytrash77@reddit
AMD. Intel is quickly falling behind and has less long-term support.
T0mBd1gg3R@reddit
Despite AMD is generally superior, I think the 14600K has pretty good value right now, depending on your country, use case, budget and situation. It's below 200 with a Battlefield 6 in bundle here. You need X3D AMD processors to get better performance, and they cost much more. As I'm coming from 12gen Intel and I already have an LGA1700 cpu, it's a logic upgrade. On the other hand, unless you build a high end PC with an expensive gpu, you won't get much worse performance with a 7600/7700 in the price range of the 14600K, with better upgrade options.
So I would say AM5 is generally superior with the fastest X3D gaming cpus, but these are expensive and 14600K is also an option, but only at this moment due to the bundle.
trevaftw@reddit
For gaming it's an AMD X3D chip no contest.
ChadHUD@reddit
AMD is the obviously superior CPU right now for almost all use cases, including productivity. Intel has some niche software wins. For gaming its not even debatable. (like its not a situation where X or Y game favors Intel, nothing favors Intel)
AMD also means you are buying into AM5. Which has 1 and perhaps as 2 more CPU generations coming for it. So if you buy a 9800x3d or any other AM5 CPU. You will be ready to drop a Zen6 into the same rig. If rumors are true we may also get a 6+ or even zen 7 on AM5 as well. Intel ultra and 14th are both DOP (Dead on purchase). Intels NEXT gen, it is rumors Intel will finally learn and plans to support 3 or 4 generations on the same socket. Right now as it stands that isn't the case. Any rig you buy now is tapped out. ZERO doubt that a Zen6 drop in replacement in a year or two is going to destroy anything you can buy from Intel today in all things.
Raytech555@reddit
You gonna be fine with either of them
kkkpl@reddit
My method before upgrading pc is... go to some pc tech sites like guru3d, check benchmarks. Sure 9800x3d is the king. But it cost twice as the i5 14600k. And the perf difference is the same? Nope. And if you play on 4k the perf is almost the same for both. It all depends what is your budget. If you have the money, go for x3d.
Davidisaloof35@reddit
AMD & Nvidia.
ArmaGhettOn84@reddit
Some people say they have no issues with AMD X3D others have stuttering problems which they dont know how to fix over months/years. I tried the 7800X3D and the 7900X3D on 3 different x670 mobos Msi carbon/asrock taichi and gigabyte Aorus Master. I had only issues with stutters, delay and crashes. Tried all possible to fix it , after 18 months i gave up and switched to Ultra Core 265K, since now all is running buttery smooth no issues at all. If i read all the posts at r/AMDHelp the issues still exist.
UltraPharaoh@reddit
I've had my first Ryzen CPU ever for the last two years and I'm very satisfied. No issues at all.
TrollCannon377@reddit
For gaming AMD is the winner hands down in the CPU market
ecktt@reddit
TLDR: AMD with the 3D L3 cache (X3D) is the fastest right now.
The truth is; it depends.
If I pair a the fastest AMD and Intel CPU with a mid-range graphics card to play games at 4K resolution with ultra settings, both CPUs will perform identically.
It might very well be that you can pick a lower priced Intel CPU and pair it with a higher priced GPU to get the best value for your money.
Sorry if I burst your bubble but it not as simple picking the fastest CPU especially if you are on a budget.
To have peak performance on the games you play , you need to research the which CPU and GPU perform the best and then try to min-max your setup.
With the current prices I suggest a budget split of 2(GPU)/1(everything else minus Keyboards, mouse and monitor).
Krauziak90@reddit
Amd X3D if you want to squeeze everything out of your system. Other than x3d everything is kinda on pair. Where single core performance matters Intel is better, but runs hotter and power draw is significantly higher.
ZELLKRATOR@reddit
The biggest bottleneck is the GPU, not the CPU. Nowadays AMDs x3D chips are far superior if you only look at gaming. But they are also more expensive now, at least where I live. Roles have switched a bit. An intel ultra 7 265kf is far cheaper than the much older 7800x3D from AMD, at least here, it's worse in gaming performance but overcomes the AMD chip in productivity with ease. If you really focus on gaming take the 7800x3D or 9800x3D, depending on the budget.
But the CPU is really one of the least important bottlenecks if they are already decent and the higher the resolution the more you utilise the GPU which then becomes the bottleneck.
ArmaGhettOn84@reddit
What resoution you wanna play?
DiligentEnthusiasm76@reddit
I'm not sure if there is any real difference in using a Intel CPU vs anAND CPU. What I have heard is that there are some najor differences in game play when using an AMD based GPU vs an INVIDA based one
McZalion@reddit
Right now AMD. Intel is stuck in their complacent era but so will AMD if intel doesn't produce anything of value other than "image" and "status"
fantaz1986@reddit
"Intel often has more cores and threads and higher clock speeds." no intel offers more E cores and it super bad for gaming because for some games you need to go in bios and disable E cores or games will lag
Comprehensive_Star72@reddit
For budget... AMD. For performance... also AMD. Don't bother getting more than 8 cores. If you find fantastic intel deals they can still game well.
Stinkytofu86@reddit
If you're playing more at 1080 and 1440p then the x3d, if 4k any top of the line cpu will work
Lopsided_Lingonberry@reddit
X3D, but slow at non-gaming, and you will NOT notice it at 4k.
No_Aerie_2717@reddit
If you dont want spend too much money then Intel
raresteakplease@reddit
Intel is on the decline, I build 2 amd systems last week with x3d chips, gaming has been amazing.
960be6dde311@reddit
Either AMD or Intel will work great. Have you done any research into YouTube videos that compare them?
Jaded_Working_8551@reddit
X3d
ilyseann_@reddit
AMD if ur only playing games on the PC. Intel for everything else, like 3D design programs, any sort of development software, or other productivity items.
dabocx@reddit
It really depends on how much of those things you actually do. It’s just a hobby a few hours a week it’s not a big deal.
If it’s your full time job then yes
ilyseann_@reddit
I think AMD is great for purely gaming. in my experience the CPUs get beat out by Intel multi core performance and stability. but that was well over 3-4 years ago and I could be wrong about they're performance now. what's your experience?
Educational-Gas-4989@reddit
Amd is better at the top end with the x3d chips but rn intel is better price to perf with the 14600k at 150 with bf6 for free
However by going with intel you also give up upgradability so even if the price to perf is better it may be a better idea to spend more for ryzen
KillEvilThings@reddit
There's this thing called benchmarks from places that are reputable that use generally controlled environments to measure performance of these components where you can decide if it's worth your money.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d/19.html
They even have a section on price to FPS. Imagine that.