Intel CPU or AMD CPU ?

[Lady Alcina Dimitrescu]

I'm thinking about purchasing a new PC.

For GPU, I decided to purchase 4060 Ti (the best one I can buy with low budget)
(No, I can't upgrade it to 4070, I aint living in America or EU countries).
But I'm very confused about CPU.

Which one should I purchase, AMD or Intel ?

AMD is cheap, gives decent performance and has really good compability with most motherboards and sockets.

While Intel also very good, but changes sockets often and a bit expensive.


Like, what you guys think ?
I'm not an expert at building PC's soo..
Yeah...

Edit:

I'm not going to play at 4k, I'm only going to play at 2k at max
I do think about taking videos and streaming (on discord to my friends or something) but not on twitch or youtube.
I do think about making videos for youtube (like taking random moments I had in games, etc etc)

I need single core performance as well as multi core, but since there is like.. No CPU that does that, I think I'll go with multicore performance. Or with cores idk.

[r.linder]

If you're only gaming, then the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is your best bet because it trades blows with the Core i9-14900K and beats the 7950X3D. If you're not just gaming but also doing a lot of heavier multi-threaded workloads and a lot of multi-tasking while gaming, then the Core i9-14900K would be a better idea.

As far as GPUs, depends on how important raytracing and DLSS are to you, because NVIDIA has generally better RT performance and DLSS is very attractive as the better alternative between it and AMD FSR (and Intel XeSS) due to the performance and visual differences since DLSS depends on the hardware whereas FSR is all software and still needs work. But NVIDIA GPUs support both, with AMD you're stuck with FSR, meaning that in games that only have DLSS, you're SOL as far as upscaling settings go.
If you're going to be doing more than just gaming, but streaming on top of that or working with CUDA, then NVIDIA Is the obvious choice because NVEC is better than the AMD alternatives and AMD doesn't have their own alternative to CUDA.
However, if you're only gaming and don't much care for RT or upscaling technology, then Radeon GPUs are still attractive because of the price/performance value.

[DeadBeat]

Publicado originalmente por Mathius:

It's a well known issue at this point that GPU sag is absolutely a thing and the small "ear" on the card is taking way too much stress.

I don't know if AMD suffers from this issue, but investing in some type of GPU support, is probably a super cheap, super necessary addition.

Indeed, an msi suprim x 4090(non-liquid) tips the scales at a whopping 5.3lbs(2.4kg). There's no way in hell I'd mount that bad boy horizontally without a support bracket. Not only do you have to account for weight but also fan vibration putting pressure on the PCIe slot but also the card's PCB.

[Lady Alcina Dimitrescu]

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

If you're only gaming, then the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is your best bet because it trades blows with the Core i9-14900K and beats the 7950X3D. If you're not just gaming but also doing a lot of heavier multi-threaded workloads and a lot of multi-tasking while gaming, then the Core i9-14900K would be a better idea.

As far as GPUs, depends on how important raytracing and DLSS are to you, because NVIDIA has generally better RT performance and DLSS is very attractive as the better alternative between it and AMD FSR (and Intel XeSS) due to the performance and visual differences since DLSS depends on the hardware whereas FSR is all software and still needs work. But NVIDIA GPUs support both, with AMD you're stuck with FSR, meaning that in games that only have DLSS, you're SOL as far as upscaling settings go.
If you're going to be doing more than just gaming, but streaming on top of that or working with CUDA, then NVIDIA Is the obvious choice because NVEC is better than the AMD alternatives and AMD doesn't have their own alternative to CUDA.
However, if you're only gaming and don't much care for RT or upscaling technology, then Radeon GPUs are still attractive because of the price/performance value.

What do you mean by Multitasking ?
I mean I like watching videos or listen to music on the background while I'm playing.

You mean like.. Streaming and playing at the same time or like, recording a video while playing a high-end game with ray-tracing ?

[r.linder]

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

If you're only gaming, then the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is your best bet because it trades blows with the Core i9-14900K and beats the 7950X3D. If you're not just gaming but also doing a lot of heavier multi-threaded workloads and a lot of multi-tasking while gaming, then the Core i9-14900K would be a better idea.

As far as GPUs, depends on how important raytracing and DLSS are to you, because NVIDIA has generally better RT performance and DLSS is very attractive as the better alternative between it and AMD FSR (and Intel XeSS) due to the performance and visual differences since DLSS depends on the hardware whereas FSR is all software and still needs work. But NVIDIA GPUs support both, with AMD you're stuck with FSR, meaning that in games that only have DLSS, you're SOL as far as upscaling settings go.
If you're going to be doing more than just gaming, but streaming on top of that or working with CUDA, then NVIDIA Is the obvious choice because NVEC is better than the AMD alternatives and AMD doesn't have their own alternative to CUDA.
However, if you're only gaming and don't much care for RT or upscaling technology, then Radeon GPUs are still attractive because of the price/performance value.

What do you mean by Multitasking ?
I mean I like watching videos or listen to music on the background while I'm playing.

You mean like.. Streaming and playing at the same time or like, recording a video while playing a high-end game with ray-tracing ?

Multi-tasking while gaming in general is better on Intel because of the extra threads, since a lot of games nowadays are basically asking for 6~8 cores as it is, it's not leaving a whole lot left for the 7800X3D to handle, and the 7950X3D is not the solution because the cache is only present in one of the two chiplets, which because of Windows' garbage task scheduler which was designed for Intel CPUs, can pick the wrong cores for the wrong load, leading to gaming performance potentially being worse than a regular 7950X or even a 7700X. But just watching or listening to videos in the background will be pretty much fine on an 8 core CPU, it's not very intensive at all, you can still sort of do that on a single core CPU with very low expectations.

So if all the system is being used for is gaming and not much else, 7800X3D makes the most sense because it's not too expensive and its performance in games is on par with the 14900K.
But if you have bigger plans for your machine and want something that'll hold up a bit longer, and don't want to upgrade within the next 5+ years, the 14900K would make a little bit more sense, and if APO takes off, then the E-cores could become less than useless for gaming too.

[River]

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

What do you mean by Multitasking ?
I mean I like watching videos or listen to music on the background while I'm playing.

You mean like.. Streaming and playing at the same time or like, recording a video while playing a high-end game with ray-tracing ?

Multi-tasking while gaming in general is better on Intel because of the extra threads, since a lot of games nowadays are basically asking for 6~8 cores as it is, it's not leaving a whole lot left for the 7800X3D to handle, and the 7950X3D is not the solution because the cache is only present in one of the two chiplets, which because of Windows' garbage task scheduler which was designed for Intel CPUs, can pick the wrong cores for the wrong load, leading to gaming performance potentially being worse than a regular 7950X or even a 7700X. But just watching or listening to videos in the background will be pretty much fine on an 8 core CPU, it's not very intensive at all, you can still sort of do that on a single core CPU with very low expectations.

So if all the system is being used for is gaming and not much else, 7800X3D makes the most sense because it's not too expensive and its performance in games is on par with the 14900K.
But if you have bigger plans for your machine and want something that'll hold up a bit longer, and don't want to upgrade within the next 5+ years, the 14900K would make a little bit more sense, and if APO takes off, then the E-cores could become less than useless for gaming too.

True.

[Lady Alcina Dimitrescu]

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

What do you mean by Multitasking ?
I mean I like watching videos or listen to music on the background while I'm playing.

You mean like.. Streaming and playing at the same time or like, recording a video while playing a high-end game with ray-tracing ?

Multi-tasking while gaming in general is better on Intel because of the extra threads, since a lot of games nowadays are basically asking for 6~8 cores as it is, it's not leaving a whole lot left for the 7800X3D to handle, and the 7950X3D is not the solution because the cache is only present in one of the two chiplets, which because of Windows' garbage task scheduler which was designed for Intel CPUs, can pick the wrong cores for the wrong load, leading to gaming performance potentially being worse than a regular 7950X or even a 7700X. But just watching or listening to videos in the background will be pretty much fine on an 8 core CPU, it's not very intensive at all, you can still sort of do that on a single core CPU with very low expectations.

So if all the system is being used for is gaming and not much else, 7800X3D makes the most sense because it's not too expensive and its performance in games is on par with the 14900K.

Is there any AMD card with more cores than 8 ?
I just need a CPU, powerfull enough to feed 4060Ti along with other programs.

[r.linder]

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

Multi-tasking while gaming in general is better on Intel because of the extra threads, since a lot of games nowadays are basically asking for 6~8 cores as it is, it's not leaving a whole lot left for the 7800X3D to handle, and the 7950X3D is not the solution because the cache is only present in one of the two chiplets, which because of Windows' garbage task scheduler which was designed for Intel CPUs, can pick the wrong cores for the wrong load, leading to gaming performance potentially being worse than a regular 7950X or even a 7700X. But just watching or listening to videos in the background will be pretty much fine on an 8 core CPU, it's not very intensive at all, you can still sort of do that on a single core CPU with very low expectations.

So if all the system is being used for is gaming and not much else, 7800X3D makes the most sense because it's not too expensive and its performance in games is on par with the 14900K.

Is there any AMD card with more cores than 8 ?
I just need a CPU, powerfull enough to feed 4060Ti along with other programs.

It's not worth buying above Ryzen 7, especially since you're only going for a 4060 Ti which isn't even worth it because you could get a faster GPU in the same budget or stepping it up a bit more to the 7800-XT, the 4060 Ti is a joke.

Ryzen 9 is usually the same or worse for gaming than Ryzen 7 but better as a "workstation" CPU which is the point, higher core count for loads that actually need it

[adhdfriendly]

Publicado originalmente por Mathius:

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

Oh it's completely okay.
You just share you opinion, which is the reason why I made this thread.
To get opinions and some advice from people.

I also like intel,I always used Intel CPU's.
They were always high quality and didn't had any trouble with them.

The reason why I think about AMD, is the features it offers.

Brand loyalty is a bad thing. In that regard, I agree with you, you should try to look at all options.

When researching power supplies, the common consensus seem to be that brands don't matter, that you need to look at the individuals power supply performance (for example.)

I can remember when people didn't even acknowledge parts brands and you just need a "VGA video card" or an "SVGA card" and the first hard choice ironically was which process as I had to decide whether or not to get an Intel chip, or a Cyrix (which merged with another company and died out.)

Now there are so many things involved it's intimidating. I'm not afraid of building a PC, I'm afraid of making the wrong parts selection.

For power supplies,you definitely need to look at the most trusted brands,PSU's are the most future part of a pc,and if your PSU fails,your MOBO,GPU etc. can fry out.Giving some extra bucks for a well trusted PSU is better than purchasing fried parts again if PSU fails.

[Omega]

Be aware that the latest generation Intel CPUs and also some of the very latest AMD CPUs (But I think only on mobile chips for now?) have both P and E cores. P cores are fast normal CPU cores and E cores are small energy efficient cores. So not all cores are equal in these CPUs.

I'd avoid any CPU which does this, especially for just gaming, I am not sold on the whole idea of P and E cores.

[_I_]

or atleast until windows can correctly identify the cores and assign tasks relevant to them

but then again, e cores are nearly useless, when an idle p core can do it so much faster

[Lady Alcina Dimitrescu]

Publicado originalmente por r.linder:

Publicado originalmente por Lady Alcina Dimitrescu:

Is there any AMD card with more cores than 8 ?
I just need a CPU, powerfull enough to feed 4060Ti along with other programs.

It's not worth buying above Ryzen 7, especially since you're only going for a 4060 Ti which isn't even worth it because you could get a faster GPU in the same budget or stepping it up a bit more to the 7800-XT, the 4060 Ti is a joke.

Before the release of 4000 Series, I was thinking of a budget build with 3060 Ti.
I want Ray Tracing support.

Tho, only 4000 series have DLSS 3.0 support.
And 4060 Ti have more performance compare to 3060 Ti.

I don't like AMD gpu's, due to their incompability with most games.

[River]

Publicado originalmente por Omega:

Be aware that the latest generation Intel CPUs and also some of the very latest AMD CPUs (But I think only on mobile chips for now?) have both P and E cores. P cores are fast normal CPU cores and E cores are small energy efficient cores. So not all cores are equal in these CPUs.

I'd avoid any CPU which does this, especially for just gaming, I am not sold on the whole idea of P and E cores.

Interesting.

That is like false marketing by Intel a little.

[Omega]

Publicado originalmente por _I_:

or atleast until windows can correctly identify the cores and assign tasks relevant to them

but then again, e cores are nearly useless, when an idle p core can do it so much faster

It doesn't do this yet?

I know that Linux will see preferred core support, at least for AMD in 6.9.

[r.linder]

The P-cores are intended for heavier tasks while the E-cores are there for lighter tasks, task scheduling just needs to be improved and the design could use some improvement as well, the 13900K and 14900K would have been more enticing if it was 12+12 and not 8+16

[Omega]

Publicado originalmente por gamer:

Publicado originalmente por Omega:

Be aware that the latest generation Intel CPUs and also some of the very latest AMD CPUs (But I think only on mobile chips for now?) have both P and E cores. P cores are fast normal CPU cores and E cores are small energy efficient cores. So not all cores are equal in these CPUs.

I'd avoid any CPU which does this, especially for just gaming, I am not sold on the whole idea of P and E cores.

Interesting.

That is like false marketing by Intel a little.

I do think it is deceptive, yes. AMD is now also doing it. They should just accept x86 should die and switch to RISC instead of abusing it like this.

I am sure we will eventually see a lawsuit about this being unfair and deceptive.