This article will take a closer look at the latest generations of Intel processors based on the Core architecture. This company occupies a leading position in the market computer systems, and most PCs are currently assembled on its semiconductor chips.
Intel development strategy
All previous generations of Intel processors were subject to a two-year cycle. A similar strategy for releasing updates from this company was called "Tick-Tock". The first stage, called "Tick", was the transfer of the CPU to a new technological process. For example, in terms of architecture, the Sandy Bridge (2nd generation) and Evie Bridge (3rd generation) generations were almost identical. But the production technology of the first was based on the norms of 32 nm, and the second - 22 nm. The same can be said about Haswell (4th generation, 22 nm) and Broadwell (5th generation, 14 nm). In turn, the “So” stage means a fundamental change in the architecture of semiconductor crystals and a significant increase in performance. Examples of transitions are:
1st generation Westmere and 2nd generation "Sunday Bridge". The technological process in this case was identical - 32 nm, but the changes in terms of chip architecture are significant - the north bridge of the motherboard and the integrated graphics accelerator were transferred to the CPU.
3rd generation "Evie Bridge" and 4th generation "Haswell". The power consumption of the computer system has been optimized, the clock frequencies of the chips have been increased.
5th generation "Broadwell" and 6th generation "SkyLike". The frequency has been increased again, power consumption has been further improved, and several new instructions have been added that improve performance.
Segmentation of processor solutions based on the Kor architecture
Intel central processing units have the following positioning:
The most affordable solutions are Celeron chips. They are suitable for assembling office computers that are designed to solve the most simple tasks.
The CPUs of the Pentium series are located one step higher. In architectural terms, they are almost completely identical to the younger Celeron models. But the increased level 3 cache and higher frequencies give them a definite advantage in terms of performance. The niche of this CPU is gaming PCs entry level.
The middle segment of the CPU from Intel is occupied by solutions based on Core Ai3. The previous two types of processors, as a rule, have only 2 computing units. The same can be said about Kor Ai3. But the first two families of chips do not have support for HyperTrading technology, while Core Ai3 does. As a result, at the software level, 2 physical modules are converted into 4 program processing threads. This provides a significant performance boost. On the basis of such products, it is already possible to assemble a mid-level gaming PC, or even an entry-level server.
The niche of solutions above the average level, but below the premium segment, is filled with chips, occupied by solutions based on Core Ai5. This semiconductor crystal boasts the presence of 4 physical cores at once. It is this architectural nuance that provides an advantage in terms of performance over the Core I3. More recent generations of Intel i5 processors have higher clock speeds and this allows you to constantly get a performance boost.
The niche of the premium segment is occupied by products based on Core Ai7. The number of computing units they have is exactly the same as that of Kor Ai5. But here they, just like Core Ai3, have support for technology code-named Hyper Trading. Therefore, at the software level, 4 cores are converted into 8 processed threads. It is this nuance that provides a phenomenal level of performance, which any price can boast of these chips.
Processor sockets
Generations are set in different types sockets. Therefore, it will not work to install the first chips on this architecture in the motherboard for the 6th generation CPU. Or, on the contrary, the chip with the code name "SkyLike" cannot be physically placed in system board for 1st or 2nd generation processors. The first processor socket was called "Socket H", or LGA 1156 (1156 is the number of pins). It was released in 2009 for the first CPUs manufactured to 45 nm (2008) and 32 nm (2009) tolerance standards based on this architecture. To date, he is outdated both morally and physically. In 2010, the LGA 1155, or "Socket H1" comes to replace. Motherboards of this series support 2nd and 3rd generation Cor chips. Their code names are, respectively, "Sandy Bridge" and "Evie Bridge". 2013 was marked by the release of the third socket for chips based on the Core architecture - LGA 1150, or Socket H2. It was possible to install CPUs of the 4th and 5th generations in this processor socket. Well, in September 2015, the LGA 1150 was replaced by the last current socket - LGA 1151.
First generation of chips
The most affordable processor products of this platform were Celeron G1101 (2.27 GHz), Pentium G6950 (2.8 GHz) and Pentium G6990 (2.9 GHz). All of them had only 2 cores. The niche of middle-level solutions was occupied by Core Ai3 with the designation 5XX (2 cores / 4 logical information processing flows). One step higher were "Cor Ai5" marked 6XX (their parameters are identical to "Cor Ai3", but the frequencies are higher) and 7XX with 4 real cores. The most productive computer systems were assembled on the basis of Kor Ai7. Their models were designated 8XX. The fastest chip in this case was marked 875K. Due to the unlocked multiplier, it was possible to overclock such a price, but he had the corresponding one. Accordingly, it was possible to obtain an impressive increase in performance. By the way, the presence of the prefix "K" in the designation of the CPU model meant that the multiplier was unlocked and this model could be overclocked. Well, the prefix "S" was added to the designation of energy-efficient chips.
Planned renovation of the architecture and the "Sandy Bridge"
The first generation of chips based on the Core architecture was replaced in 2010 by solutions code-named Sandy Bridge. Their key "features" were the transfer of the north bridge and the integrated graphics accelerator to the silicon chip of the silicon processor. The niche of the most budgetary solutions was occupied by the Celerons of the G4XX and G5XX series. In the first case, the L3 cache was truncated and only one core was present. The second series, in turn, could boast of having two computing units at once. The Pentiums of the G6XX and G8XX models are one step higher. In this case, the difference in performance was provided by higher frequencies. It was the G8XX that, because of this important characteristic, looked preferable in the eyes of the end user. The Cor Ai3 line was represented by 21XX models (it is the number "2" that indicates that the chip belongs to the second generation of the Cor architecture). Some of them had a “T” index added at the end - more energy efficient solutions with reduced performance.
In turn, the decisions of "Kor Ay5" had the designations 23XX, 24XX and 25XX. The higher the model number, the more high level CPU performance. The "T" index at the end is the most energy efficient solution. If the letter "S" is added at the end of the name - an intermediate option for power consumption between "T" - the chip version and the standard crystal. Index "P" - the graphics accelerator is disabled in the chip. Well, chips with the letter "K" had an unlocked multiplier. This marking is also relevant for the 3rd generation of this architecture.
The emergence of a new more progressive technological process
In 2013, the 3rd generation of CPUs based on this architecture saw the light of day. Its key innovation is an updated technical process. In the rest, no significant innovations were introduced into them. They were physically compatible with the previous generation of CPUs and could be installed on the same motherboards. Their designation structure remained identical. "Celerons" had the designation G12XX, and "Pentiums" - G22XX. Only at the beginning, instead of “2”, there was already “3”, which indicated belonging to the 3rd generation. The Cor Ai3 line had indexes 32XX. More advanced "Cor Ai5" were designated 33XX, 34XX and 35XX. Well, the flagship solutions of Kor Ay7 were marked 37XX.
The fourth revision of the architecture "Cor"
The next step was the 4th generation of Intel processors based on the Core architecture. The marking in this case was:
CPU economy class "Celerons" were designated G18XX.
"Pentiums" had indexes G32XX and G34XX.
For "Cor Ay3" such designations were assigned - 41XX and 43XX.
"Cor Ai5" could be recognized by the abbreviation 44XX, 45XX and 46XX.
Well, 47XX were allocated to designate "Cor Ai7".
Fifth generation of chips
based on this architecture was mainly focused on use in mobile devices. For desktop PCs, only the chips of the AI 5 and AI 7 lines were released. And only very limited quantity models. The first of them were designated 56XX, and the second - 57XX.The most recent and promising solutions
The 6th generation of Intel processors debuted in early autumn 2015. This is the most current processor architecture at the moment. Entry-level chips are designated in this case G39XX ("Celeron"), G44XX and G45XX (this is how "Pentiums" are marked). Core Ai3 processors are designated 61XX and 63XX. In turn, "Cor Ay5" is 64XX, 65XX and 66XX. Well, only the 67XX marking is allocated for the designation of flagship solutions. The new generation of Intel processors is only at the beginning of its life cycle and such chips will be relevant for quite a long time.
Overclocking Features
Almost all chips based on this architecture have a locked multiplier. Therefore, overclocking in this case is possible only by increasing the frequency. In the last, 6th generation, even this possibility of increasing performance will have to be disabled in the BIOS by manufacturers. motherboards. An exception in this regard are the processors of the "Cor Ai5" and "Cor Ai7" series with the "K" index. Their multiplier is unlocked and this allows you to significantly increase the performance of computer systems based on such semiconductor products.
Owners opinion
All generations of Intel processors listed in this material have a high degree energy efficiency and a phenomenal level of performance. Their only drawback is their high cost. But the reason here lies in the fact that the direct competitor of Intel, represented by AMD, cannot oppose it more or less worthwhile solutions. Therefore, Intel, based on its own considerations, sets the price tag for its products.
Results
In this article, generations of Intel processors for desktop PCs were considered in detail. Even this list is enough to get lost in the designations and names. Other than that, there are also options for PC enthusiasts (platform 2011) and various mobile sockets. All this is done only so that the end user can choose the most optimal one for solving their problems. Well, the most relevant now of the options considered are the 6th generation chips. It is on them that you need to pay attention when buying or assembling a new PC.
Once, a great sage in captain's uniform said that a computer would not be able to work without a processor. Since then, everyone considers it his duty to find the very processor, thanks to which his system will fly like a fighter.
From this article you will learn:
Since we simply cannot cover all known science chips, we want to focus on one interesting family of the Intelovich family - Core i5. They have very interesting characteristics and good performance.
Why this particular series and not i3 or i7? It's simple: excellent potential without overpaying for unnecessary instructions that the seventh line sins with. Yes, and more cores than in Core i3. You will quite naturally start arguing about support and you will be partially right, but 4 physical cores can do much more than 2 + 2 virtual ones.
Series history
Today on the agenda we have a comparison of processors Intel Core i5 different generations. Here I would like to touch on such pressing topics as heat pack and the presence of solder under the lid. And if there is a mood, then we will also push especially interesting stones together with our foreheads. So let's go.
I would like to start with the fact that only desktop processors will be considered, and not options for a laptop. There will be a comparison of mobile chips, but another time.
The output frequency table looks like this:
| Generation | Year of issue | Architecture | Series | socket | Number of cores/threads | Level 3 cache |
| 1 | 2009 (2010) | Hehalem (Westmere) | i5-7xx (i5-6xx) | LGA 1156 | 4/4 (2/4) | 8 MB (4 MB) |
| 2 | 2011 | Sandy Bridge | i5-2xxx | LGA 1155 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 3 | 2012 | Ivy Bridge | i5-3xxx | LGA 1155 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 4 | 2013 | Haswell | i5-4xxx | LGA 1150 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 5 | 2015 | Broadwell | i5-5xxx | LGA 1150 | 4/4 | 4 MB |
| 6 | 2015 | skylake | i5-6xxx | LGA 1151 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 7 | 2017 | Kaby Lake | i5-7xxx | LGA 1151 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 8 | 2018 | coffee lake | i5-8xxx | LGA 1151v2 | 6/6 | 9 MB |
2009
The first representatives of the series saw the light back in 2009. They were created on 2 different architectures: Nehalem (45nm) and Westmere (32nm). The brightest representatives of the line should be called i5-750 (4x2.8 GHz) and i5-655K (3.2 GHz). The latter additionally had an unlocked multiplier and the possibility of overclocking, which indicated its high performance in games and not only.
The differences between the architectures lie in the fact that Westmare is built according to the 32 nm process technology and has 2 generation gates. Yes, they use less energy.
2011
This year saw the light of the second generation of processors - Sandy Bridge. Their distinguishing feature was the presence of a built-in Intel HD 2000 video core.
Among the abundance of i5-2xxx models, I would especially like to single out a CPU with an index of 2500K. At one time, it made a splash among gamers and enthusiasts, combining a high frequency of 3.2 GHz with support for turbo boost and low cost. And yes, there was solder under the cover, not thermal paste, which additionally contributed to the high-quality acceleration of the stone without consequences.
2012
The debut of Ivy Bridge brought 22nm process technology, higher frequencies, new DDR3, DDR3L and PCI-E 3.0 controllers, and USB 3.0 support (but only for i7).
The integrated graphics have evolved to the Intel HD 4000.
The most interesting solution on this platform was the Core i5-3570K with an unlocked multiplier and a frequency of up to 3.8 GHz in boost.
2013
The Haswell generation brought nothing supernatural except for the new LGA 1150 socket, the AVX 2.0 instruction set and the new HD 4600 graphics. In fact, all the emphasis was on energy saving, which the company managed to achieve.
But as a fly in the ointment, there is a replacement of solder with a thermal interface, which greatly reduced the overclocking potential of the top i5-4670K (and its updated version 4690K from the Haswell Refresh line).
2015
In fact, this is the same Haswell, transferred to the 14 nm architecture.
2016
The sixth iteration, named Skylake, brought an updated LGA 1151 socket, support for DDR4 RAM, 9th generation IGP, AVX 3.2 instructions, and SATA Express.
Among the processors, it is worth highlighting the i5-6600K and 6400T. The first was loved for high frequencies and an unlocked multiplier, and the second for its low cost and extremely low heat dissipation of 35 W despite Turbo Boost support.
2017
The era of Kaby Lake is the most controversial, as it brought absolutely nothing new to the desktop processor segment other than native USB 3.1 support. also, these stones completely refuse to run on Windows 7, 8 and 8.1, not to mention older versions.
The socket remained the same - LGA 1151. And the set of interesting processors has not changed - 7600K and 7400T. The reasons for people's love are the same as for Skylake.
2018
Goffee Lake processors are fundamentally different from their predecessors. Four cores were replaced by 6, which previously only the top versions of the X-series i7 could afford. The size of the L3 cache was increased to 9 MB, and the heat pack in most cases does not exceed 65 watts.
Of the entire collection, the i5-8600K model is considered the most interesting for its ability to overclock up to 4.3 GHz (though only 1 core). However, the public prefers the i5-8400 as the cheapest "entrance" ticket.
Instead of totals
If we were asked what we would offer the lion's share of gamers, we would say without hesitation that the i5-8400. The benefits are obvious:
- price below $190
- 6 full physical cores;
- frequency up to 4 GHz in Turbo Boost
- heat pack 65 W
- complete fan.
Additionally, you do not have to select a "certain" RAM, as for the Ryzen 1600 (the main competitor by the way), and the cores themselves in Intel. You lose additional virtual threads, but practice shows that in games they only reduce FPS without introducing certain adjustments to the gameplay.
By the way, if you don’t know where to buy, I recommend paying attention to some very popular and serious online store- at the same time you can find your bearings there on prices for i5 8400 From time to time I buy different gadgets here.
In any case, it's up to you. Until we meet again, do not forget to subscribe to the blog.
And more news for those who follow (solid state drives) - this rarely happens.
The processor industry is no less dynamic than other areas information technologies. Although the constant improvements of the latest microarchitectures and the release of new ones did not make revolutionary breakthroughs at the beginning of 2016, they gave us a wider choice within certain classes of central processors.
Once again, we will discuss which of the processors is better - Intel or AMD, as well as compare the processors for the system for different tasks. I must say right away that the opinion in this article is subjective and can be both supported and refuted by any person and without consequences. In this article there will be no defense of one side or another, everything will be based on the real state of affairs of the world market for central processors.
In addition, let's touch on the segment of mobile solutions a little. Specific answers for systems for certain types of tasks will be given in the conclusions, I advise you to hold out and read to the end.
For convenience and quick transition, the content of the article is given:
AMD vs Intel. A little historical introduction
So let's go. Intel Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices were founded around the same time: in 1968 and 1969, respectively. That is, both companies have vast experience both in the production of processors and in competition with each other. But for some reason, among ordinary "users" Intel is much more famous. And even in some antediluvian technical educational institutions they study in detail the old i8080 processor, which is sore for all technical students. AMD at that time simply released 8080 clones in the form of Am9080 processors. And the first successful AMD processor of its own design can be called the Am2900 processor.
Okay, let's not talk about sad old processors with frequency at 3 MHz, made according to technical process 6 µm and equipped with an 8-bit data bus. And better, we will slowly move, directly, to the topic of our discussion, and to modern processors with more joyful characteristics.
Myths about AMD
I would like to immediately dispel the myths about "burning" and "not subject to" overclocking AMD processors. To date, such statements are based on "naked" rumors. About ten years ago, there were many cases of Athlon 1400-type processors failing, which simply burned out after the cooler that cooled the processor heatsink failed. Yes, it was relevant then, but talking about it when it's 2015 and AMD processors are equipped with excellent thermal protection technology is simply blasphemy.
Yes, and the thermal regime depends on various factors, and not only on the processor itself, for example, the efficiency of the processor cooler, as well as the quality applying thermal paste. I will not talk much about overclocking and give specific processor models, but simply state the fact that there are processors from the Black Edition series on sale, which are focused on overclocking by the manufacturer. It is the same with AMD's new FX, they not only proved to be suitable for good overclocking, but also boast world records in overclocking.
The negative myths about AMD are over, now we can remember about Intel. It seems that there were no negative myths about Intel. In those days when the Athlones "burned", one could only hear flattering reviews about the Pentium. This processor was known and revered by many, and even now to the question: “What kind of computer do you have?”. Sometimes you can hear a proud answer - Pentium.
2016 Comparison of the main lines of processors from AMD and Intel
I will sharply declare that as of 2016, among AMD and Intel, one can confidently single out the clear leader in the processor hit parade. And based on this article, you will be able to choose and buy a processor, really, taking into account all the needs. If, in the article which video card is better Since we could not single out a large-scale leader, everything is a little clearer here. But this leader will be voiced with rather generalized notes, since no one has canceled the specifics of the working and budgetary spheres, but more on that later.
In this subsection of the article, we will go through the main processor lines from the two companies and analyze their performance under various types loads, and already in the conclusions, as promised, recommendations will be given for choosing a processor for certain tasks. Accordingly, taking into account specific tasks, the advantage of certain processors will change significantly.
The description and resolution of the dilemma “what is better: amd or intel” should be approached comprehensively and from different viewing angles, because the average consumer needs one thing, and the avid gamer or overclocker needs something completely different. I must say right away that the answer will be dynamic, and I will try to update the article as radically new processor lines from both companies are born, because this year one is leading, and the next - the other.
Let's start a little further. When Intel quietly and peacefully continued to release good and quality processors, the AMD Athlon 64 line was born with a modified K8 microarchitecture. It was after the appearance of these processors that many started talking about AMD, and many even moved out of Intel at that time. A few years ago, there were more or less equal "battles" of Phenom processors on K10 with the corresponding Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad models from Intel. During these periods, a widespread opinion appeared that AMD processors in the middle and budget price range surpass Intel in terms of price / quality ratio. For AMD, everything seemed to be going very, very well, but then the Nehalem microarchitecture appeared, which dealt a significant blow to AMD and revolutionized the processor market.
Core i3/i5/i7 on Sandy Bridge began to be actively bought up, raising Intel higher and higher over AMD. A little later, Intel turned the heat on the fire, releasing second-generation Sandy Bridge processors. They turned out to be no less successful than their predecessors: many liked the i5-2400, 2500, i7-2700, and for good reason. Let's not delve into microarchitecture, I’ll just say that Intel developers have thoroughly finalized it, adding many different technologies and features.
A little time passed, and Intel announced the third generation processors - Ivy Bridge. The intel core i5-3570K, i7-3770K and many others processors did not go unnoticed, although they cannot boast of significant improvements. But given the fact that prices for Ivy and Sandy Bridge are not separated by an abyss, it would be more reasonable to buy a slightly honed Ivy Bridge.
And what did you do at that time? AMD? AMD calmly continues to refine the K10 microarchitecture, slowly adding frequencies to the Phenom. Although AMD Phenom II 9xx processors look very good on the processor market, due to their capabilities and prices, they are already obsolete and it is quite difficult for them to compete with new products from Intel.
Then a line of hybrids is announced AMD processors Llano with a bet on integrated graphics right on the processor chip. The decision is quite interesting, given that the Llano graphics perform well, but in the computational tests, these hybrid chips perform like a dual-core Intel Core i3-2100. Some variant of saving on a video card will be to their taste, especially since the savings are significant and Llano processors will be marked by us in the results as an interesting budget option. In addition, more than new line A-series processors are Trinity processors, they offer more powerful graphics than Llano, which looks even more delicious for entry-level home systems. Trinity graphics are rightfully considered the best in the world among processors integrated on a chip.
Things didn't go well in the top segment. Everyone was looking forward to the enchanting departure of the legendary processors based on the Bulldozer architecture. Everyone was waiting for a revolution in the processor market, but instead a raw 8-core product was born. In addition, these 8 cores are not quite complete, since the developers combined every two cores in the Bulldozer microarchitecture into 1 module, which can be compared (conditionally) with one core of Ivy Bridge processors. But once again I emphasize that this comparison is very conditional, since depending on the types of tasks, this very convention can be broken to smithereens both in favor of Intel and AMD.
Then the completion of Bulldozer was announced - Vishera processors with microarchitecture Piledriver- which, according to AMD representatives, gives an increase in the region of 10-15%, while having a lower TDP and supporting all this with a very attractive price.
Of course, it should be noted that both Bulldozer processors and, in particular, their improved version - Vishera– show excellent results under multi-threaded load, this is clearly seen in the working tests of 3d max:
Less is better
The FX8350 beats the i7-3770K. Approximately the same situation will be observed in all applications that can create 8 high-quality threads, that is, in most graphics packages, as well as in any other types of complex calculations. If you analyze the results, you can see that the gap from the i7-3770K is insignificant, but given the approximate prices of these models - $340 for the i7-3770K and $209 for the FX-8350, I think questions about a more profitable processor for these types of tasks should be taken off. Also, the even cheaper FX-8320 will be of interest for these tasks.
But when a single-threaded load falls on the processor, then due to the same unfinished microarchitecture, the bulldozer often loses to opponents from Intel. Those same games usually can't load more than four cores, which as a result exposes the shortcomings of the Bulldozer cores individually. AMD Vishera processors corrected the situation a little, but the lag is still noticeable. For clarity, here are some game tests:
Of course, the gaming load falls on the video card to a greater extent, but the processor is an equally important link here. Moreover, games that are quite demanding on processor resources often skip.
The selection of the above tests is too small, but the general trend of test results both on domestic and foreign sites is exactly the same: the tests clearly show that the i5-3570K confidently outperforms opponents from AMD in the face of the new FX-4300, FX-6300 and FX-8350.
Starting from 2015, the Sunnywell company AMD, on which there were practically no hopes in terms of innovation, of course, announced the introduction of a new line, referred to as Carrizo. Representatives agreed that Carizzo is the sixth generation, but why the little-known Brazos is not taken into account is not clear. Anyway, it is worth highlighting the following points of this sensational line, presented in Germany.
- Carizzo is located exclusively on one chip, and before that the southbridge and the graphics chip were located on two chips. The functionality of the device is based on 28 nanometers using the Global Foundries process.
- Four cores have the Excavator architecture. The processor frequency was raised by only 1 MHz compared to the previous Steamroller, so the data processing performance per core, alas, increased slightly, but in general, everything is not so bad - an increase of around 15%, while maintaining the previous data processing principles in general .
- The graphic side has also been updated. In particular, graphics core received 512 KB of memory of the second level. There are significant performance improvements when matching with tessellation, and most importantly, color reproduction is lossless.
At the same time, Intel did not stint on the creation and release of a new generation of processors, which were called Broadwell. And it is worth noting right away that every fan of the Intel team was upset. The processor is based on Haswell, made according to the 14-nm process technology. The functionality of the cores and the microarchitecture did not receive any changes, so the desktop Broadwell turned out, to put it mildly, not well.
One of the advantages is the reduction of heat generation. The integrated graphics core Iris Pro 6200 has also been added. This, perhaps, is all the main important additions to the processor from by Intel.
But if we consider in general, for most games, then AMD processors also feel quite good.
In these tests, the main thing for us is not the specifics of the FPS of the two games, but the general trend of the FX processors lagging behind in games. In the conclusions, we will note this fact, which will go to AMD's liability.
Notebook CPUs
Intel has been reigning in the laptop processor segment for quite a long time, and it reigns very thoroughly. In laptops, both budget and top-class, Core ix processors flaunt, which we praised a little higher.
The release of Llano processors did not change the balance of power very much, but brought some variety to the budget segment of laptops. But the Trinity processors can be called a really good attack from AMD. Even more powerful integrated graphics at an affordable price, plus these processors support Dual Graphics technology. This technology allows the integrated graphics of Trinity processors to work in conjunction with a discrete adapter. As a result, the "integrated Trinty graphics + discrete Radeon HD 7670M" bundle looks very attractive, given the overall graphics performance and low cost.
We can safely say that in the budget segment of laptops, AMD Trinity A4 and A6 series are very interesting for the buyer, as they guarantee more powerful graphics than integrated graphics in Intel processors.
In the mid-range mobile segment, A10 processors paired with the HD 7670 will also please with their graphics performance. But already in the fight against certain Core i5, they will have problems on the computing front. With all this middle class laptops remain subject to fierce competition and many will opt for the A10 + HD 7670. So in the mid-range and budget segment, it is not so easy to determine which processor is best for a laptop.
Returning to the same Carrizo from AMD, which was released in 2015, it is worth noting that the system already has an integrated UVD-6 video decoder. Thanks to this decoder, it became possible to view video in H.264 and H.265 formats. As stated by the manufacturers of Carrizo, this is the world's first laptop chip, which is subject to H.265 decoding.
Intel is also on the cutting edge when it comes to laptop graphics, but it's far behind AMD, as strange as it sounds. So, a test was conducted in which Carrizo from AMD and Broadwell from Intel competed, playing 4-K video in HEVC format. The results were stunning, when playing video, a laptop with AMD-shny Carrizo did not even load the processor even half, while its competitor Inrel was loaded at 80, and sometimes 100%.
Thus, if back in 2013 Intel was in the lead, then the situation for 2015 has changed somewhat, and now a self-respecting user will prefer a laptop with higher graphics performance running Carrizo processors from AMD.
I would like to note that the purchase of a high-performance laptop is a very controversial thing, I advise you to read the article “ laptop or desktop PC”, which will not let you stumble on this deceptive front.
Okay, let's not get hung up on laptop processors, but rather let's move on to the conclusions.
AMD and Intel. Which processors are better? conclusions
It remains to sum up the small results in the battle between AMD and Intel.From the last of the above, everything becomes clear, but let's judge objectively, because everyone has the right to make a mistake, and we will believe that this mistake will be worked out. Let's pay attention to the class of tasks performed by these processors in order to fully judge in the end.
Processor for a budget system with undemanding tasks
To begin with, let's answer what is better than amd or intel in the budget segment of the market. Budget systems are quite widespread. These can be both home computers and office systems, where the boss is trying to buy a fleet of machines for the price of a configuration of one normal system.
Here, it seems to me, it is worth giving the advantage to AMD. The same new Trinity, like the $50-60 A4-5300, will look great in budget home systems, especially when trying to stress the system. graphics tasks such as games. Well, or at worst, you can complete the system with the cheapest Llano, for $40.
For an office fleet of machines, Trinity will also be a good solution, but here they are running out of Pentium G, as in computing tasks they show a higher level of performance due to the second-generation Sandy Bridge architecture and a slightly larger volume cache memory.
AMD-shnaya Carrizo 2015 will be an excellent solution not only for home use, but may well take pride of place among office machines. But main goal AMD has been releasing a brand new processor that will meet the needs of laptop functionality.
The Intel company with Broadwell, which has become an "unloved child", is largely losing ground to AMD-shnikam. So, in particular, although Broadwell is stuffed with a powerful graphics core Iris Pro 6200, but the functionality at the level of office calculations leaves much to be desired. Broadwell is not far from Sandy Bridge, who really coped with computing tasks at the proper level.
So for the office fleet of cars good choice there will be a budget processor Intel Pentium G on Sandy Bridge, released in 2013 or new job Carrizo 2015 from AMD.
gaming computer processor
Class gaming computers most comprehensive because it covers like an average? as well as the top segment of processors, there is no longer a place for integrated graphics, and systems are usually equipped with high-performance video cards, which just do the bulk of the work in games. But a lot also depends on the processor, since no one has canceled the balance in the system.
From the previously analyzed test results, we can confidently say that for the average game system required by Intel. If you are not sorry to overpay a little, and at the same time you want to get a certain reserve for the next year or two in most games, then the Core i5 on Ivy Bridge in most cases will be the best option than any of the Vishera. By no means do I want to say that Vishera is absolutely not suitable for games. Due to its price, the same FX-6300 will be a very good option for an inexpensive gaming system, although the Core i3 is running out of it here.
But the championship for gaming loads and a home system like "for all tasks" is still for the Core i5, as the mainstream version can be called the Core i5-3570 or i5-3470 . In particularly extreme gaming scenarios, an even more advanced solution would be the Core i7, but at this stage in the development of the gaming industry and the classic use case, its performance is excessive in most cases.
So for a good gaming system, an Intel core i5 is recommended (in some cases, i7), and for a cheaper gaming system, the FX-6300 is a good fit - here you already need to look at secondary tasks and, starting from them, give preference to one or another option.
Processor for demanding computing work
Processing and encoding video / audio, work in complex graphic applications, as well as any other type of complex computational work or work in entry-level servers - all this can often be divided into many threads.
As we said earlier, multithreading is the strong point of the FX-8350. With its low cost, this processor shows the level of i7-3770K, and sometimes bypasses it in the above types of tasks. Therefore, for workloads, if you do not want to spend extra money, only the FX-8350.
Of course, if there are extra funds, then you can overpay and get a universal i7-3770K, both for work and for games, which will also be a reasonable option, but still according to the well-known price / performance ratio for complex computing tasks FX- 8350 confidently overtakes opponents from Intel.
Also, do not forget about the "hard solution" from Intel, in the form of the same Core i7-3970X. This processor is the best option among the desktop ones: it can do everything and is better than everyone else, but there is only one thing it cannot do - be cheap, its cost is about $1000. The perfect extreme option for those who like to throw money.
The processor options given here for different types of tasks are very general and cannot accurately reflect each separate case, where secondary, but no less important tasks may arise, and the budget for the purchase may also have a significant impact.
If we talk about the financial side of the issue, then the AMD-shny Carrizo processor is included in the price range from 350 to 750 US dollars, which is due to the category of application. Accordingly, laptop processors are relatively more expensive than desktop processors, so again you have to choose according to the accumulated budget. But it is only worth noting that Carrizo, based on eight graphics and four processor cores, in addition has a technology for optimizing 15 W power supply. Thanks to this, the new device works 2.4 times faster than the previous generation Kaveri.
The minimum cost of Intel processors in 2015 is $ 380, which does not at all correspond to the parameters that are inherent in Broadwell. In particular, the graphics core of the latest generation Iris Pro 6200 determined the main role in terms of cost; a slightly improved microarchitecture that simply improved on Haswell's predecessor, and high rate reducing heat generation. And this, perhaps, is all that Intel can boast about its latest work.
This is how the comparison of processors turned out and the answer to the question: “Which processors are better, Intel or AMD?”
Perhaps there are some controversial points, I will be very glad to have your corrections or additions in the comments, but without a holivar and offensive bias.
Finally, we wish AMD to pleasantly surprise us with the Streamroller microarchitecture soon, and also try to give a worthy rebuff to Intel, because we don't need a monopoly and inflated prices.
We wish Intel to reduce prices for their processors and continue to produce the same good, powerful and high-quality products.
And to you, dear friends, I wish stable operation"hearts" of your computers, regardless of who and when they were released. All the best!
Building a computer can be very difficult, especially if you are not experienced in solving such problems. Exists great amount components that you can use, but it is important to choose compatible components that will give you maximum performance.
The central processing unit is one of the most important components of a computer, it is here that all calculations are performed. It controls the operation of all other components, so it is important to choose correct option. At the moment, devices from two manufacturers are available to you: an AMD processor or an Intel processor. These companies make almost all of the PC processors in the world. But they are quite different from each other. In this article, we will look at how these processors differ so that you can choose which processor is better than amd or intel in 2016.
Before proceeding to review detailed specifications processor and technology, let's go back to the roots and see how both companies started.
Intel is a bit older than AMD, founded by Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore in 1968. Initially, the company was engaged in the development of integrated circuits, then engaged in the production of processors. The first processor was intel model 8008. Back in the 90s, the company became the largest manufacturer of processors. And still continues to invent and implement new technologies.
Oddly enough, AMD or Advanced Micro Devices was created with the support of Intel. The company was established a year later - in 1969 and its goal was to develop microcircuits for computers. At first, Intel supported AMD, for example, by providing technology licenses, as well as financially, but then their relationship deteriorated and the companies became direct competitors. And now let's move closer to the processors themselves and their characteristics.
Price and performance
Both Intel and AMD offer processors in a wide price range. But AMD processors are cheaper. The cheapest are AMD Sempron and Athlon, these A-series dual-core processors start at $30. The Intel Celeron G1820 dual-core processor is slightly more expensive at $45. But this does not mean that AMD chips are definitely better. Intel is known to give better performance for the same price. You'll get a more powerful processor if you choose Intel's Celeron, Pentium, or Core. If you perform amd comparison and intel 2016, the former consume less power, generate less heat, and higher performance is confirmed by many tests.
But there are a few exceptions to this rule, AMD sells quad-core processors much cheaper than Intel, for example, you can get the A6-5400K for as little as $45. If you are using software, which needs a lot of cores, but cannot afford an Intel Core i5, then you will be better off using AMD. The same is true for the eight-core processors from the AMD FX series, they are much cheaper than the Intel Core i7.
AMD chips also provide better integrated graphic cards. For example, the AMD A10-7870K allows you to play most games in low detail at resolutions up to 1080p. Sure, it's not a gaming card, but it excels at everything. Intel cards HD Graphics, so if you want to play on budget device, it is better to choose AMD.
CPU overclocking
Most processors have a fixed clock speed, and this is set at a level that ensures that the processor will run as stable and as long as possible. Users who want to get more performance overclock the processor by increasing its frequency.
AMD supports overclocking much better than Intel. You can overclock both cheap processors for $45 and more expensive ones for $100. As for Intel, here you can overclock processors of only one category - Pentium, for $70. It is well suited for such a task, and from a base frequency of 3.2 GHz it can be overclocked to 4.5 GHz. AMD processors, the FX series with a frequency of 5 GHz, support overclocking to 13 GHz, although special cooling is needed here.
In fact, budget Intel processors are not designed for overclocking, but AMD is quite suitable. If you're into overclocking, then AMD is a great choice. There are some high-end Intel chips, with eight or ten cores. They are much faster than AMD chips. But AMD has plenty of headroom, so they dominate overclocking. You won't find anything faster for home use.
Gaming performance
Gaming is one of the most basic areas where a powerful processor is needed. AMD has several processors that come with an integrated graphics card ATI Radeon. They offer excellent value for money. Intel also has such solutions, but if we compare intel and amd processors, then its performance is lower.
But there is one problem, AMD processors are not as fast as Intel, and if you compare AMD vs Intel, then Intel can behave better in heavy games. The Intel Core i5 and i7 will perform much better in games if you use a good external graphics card. The difference between amd and intel processors is that Intel can deliver 30-40 more frames per second.
energy efficiency
The confrontation between AMD and Intel, or rather, AMD's attempts to keep up with Intel is much worse than it looks. Both companies are holding up well, but the processors should consume a lot less power. Let's try to compare intel vs amd processors.
For example, the Intel Pentium G3258 consumes 53 watts, the same amount consumes the A6-7400K from AMD. However, in tests, Intel's chip is faster in many ways, sometimes by a wide margin. This means that the Intel chip will run faster while consuming less power, so AMD will generate more heat and, as a result, produce more noise.
If the question is which processor is better amd or intel for a laptop, then energy efficiency is even more important here, because it directly affects battery life. Intel processors last longer, but Intel has not forced AMD out of the laptop market. AMD processors with integrated graphics are found on laptops over $500.
conclusions
AMD and Intel have been fighting for two decades, but in the last few years, Intel has begun to take over. The new Pentium processors have slowly displaced AMD at various price points.
If you have enough budget, then Intel will obviously best solution. This will remain true if your budget allows you to purchase an Intel Core i5. AMD can't compete with Intel on performance, at least not yet.
If your budget is small, then you should probably look towards AMD, here the performance loss is offset by an increase in the number of cores. With some operations, such processors cope faster, for example, AMD encodes video faster.
If we make a comparison intel processors and amd 2016, then Intel is more energy efficient, so it produces less heat and noise. For a regular computer, these features are not so important, but for a laptop, efficiency is very important.
But all is not lost with AMD, in 2017, the company is going to release a new architecture - Zen. According to the available information, it is very promising. If you still want to buy AMD, then you should wait for the release of Zen.
Thus, the Intel processor is better than AMD, but in some situations the latter can give excellent performance and overtake Intel. For operating system Linux does not really matter the manufacturer of the processor. This is exactly the component that is fully supported by the kernel. And which processor to choose AMD or Intel in 2016, in your opinion? Which is better amd or intel? Which one would you choose? Write in the comments!
To complete the video from 16 bit ago about history of Intel vs AMD:
When choosing a processor from Intel, the question arises: which chip from this corporation to choose? Processors have many characteristics and parameters that affect their performance. And in accordance with it and some features of the microarchitecture, the manufacturer gives the appropriate name. Our task is to shed light on this issue. In this article, you will learn what exactly the names of Intel processors mean, and also learn about the microarchitecture of chips from this company.
indication
It should be noted in advance that solutions before 2012 will not be considered here, since technology is moving at a rapid pace and these chips have too little performance with high power consumption, and they are also difficult to buy in new condition. Also, server solutions will not be considered here, since they have a specific scope and are not intended for the consumer market.
Attention, the nomenclature set out below may not be valid for processors older than the period indicated above.
And also if you have any difficulties, you can visit the site. And read this article, which talks about. And if you want to know about integrated graphics from Intel, then you.
tick-tock
Intel has a special strategy for releasing its "stones", called Tick-Tock (Tick-Tock). It consists of annual consistent improvements.
- A tick means a change in microarchitecture, which leads to a change in socket, improved performance and optimization of power consumption.
- This means that it leads to a decrease in power consumption, the possibility of placing a larger number of transistors on a chip, a possible increase in frequencies and an increase in cost.
This is what this strategy looks like for desktop and laptop models:
| MICROARCHITECRURE | STAGE | EXIT | TECHNICAL PROCESS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nehalem | So | 2009 | 45 nm |
| Westmere | Teak | 2010 | 32 nm |
| Sandy Bridge | So | 2011 | 32 nm |
| Ivy Bridge | Teak | 2012 | 22 nm |
| Haswell | So | 2013 | 22 nm |
| Broadwell | Teak | 2014 | 14 nm |
| skylake | So | 2015 | 14 nm |
| Kaby Lake | So+ | 2016 | 14 nm |
But at low power solutions(smartphones, tablets, netbooks, nettops) platforms look like this:
| CATEGORY | PLATFORM | NUCLEUS | TECHNICAL PROCESS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Netbooks/Nettops/Notebooks | Braswell | airmont | 14 nm |
| Bay Trail D/M | Silvermont | 22 nm | |
| Top tablets | Willow Trail | Goldmont | 14 nm |
| cherry trail | airmont | 14 nm | |
| Bay Tral-T | Silvermont | 22 nm | |
| Clower Trail | Satwell | 32 nm | |
| Top/Medium Smartphones/Tablets | morganfield | Goldmont | 14 nm |
| moorefield | Silvermont | 22 nm | |
| Merrifield | Silvermont | 22 nm | |
| Clower Trail+ | Satwell | 32 nm | |
| Medfield | Satwell | 32 nm | |
| Medium/budget smartphones/tablets | Binghamton | airmont | 14 nm |
| riverton | airmont | 14 nm | |
| Slayton | Silvermont | 22 nm |
It should be noted that Bay Trail-D is made for desktops: Pentium and Celeron with index J. And Bay Trail-M for is mobile solution and will also be designated among Pentium and Celeron by its letter - N.
Judging by the latest trends of the company, the performance itself is progressing quite slowly, while energy efficiency (performance per unit of energy consumed) is growing year by year, and look soon laptops will have the same powerful processors, as on large PCs (although there are such representatives now).