Reply to post: Re: Cost of AMD CPU In General

Core-blimey! Intel's Core i9 18-core monster – the numbers

anonymous boring coward Silver badge

Re: Cost of AMD CPU In General

AMD has better value CPUs if you don't need the absolutely fastest available. It has had this for a long time now. With Ryzen they may actually now compete, or beat, Intel in the top performance level too.

Cheap motherboards for AMD are easier to find, and AMD traditionally has had good upgrade paths for faster CPUs on older motherboards (i.e sockets). Meaning often RAM and Mobo investments can be kept for longer.

Sadly Ryzen isn't available for AM3+ sockets, so there is a definite break with the previous generation AMD CPUs. (AM3+ has had a good run though).

I have run AMD in all my PCs for the last 18 years, so someone may want to add Intel info and correct me on the value aspect..

P.S: There was a debacle about Intel's compilers fixing the binaries to run much faster on Intel CPUs, in effect making benchmark software (as well as actual applications) favour Intel. IRL AMDs are quite fast.

P.P.S: "Is there something about AMD i am missing - and why don't vendors use AMD more ?"

There is a lot of business decision making going on, with lock-ins, Intel leveraging it's size, sales trickery, and so on. Comparable to MS vs the rest.

P.P.P.S: The value of having at least one other player competing with Intel is immense. That's one reason II never abandoned AMD.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019