This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

More cores in a processor are better right? So why is Intel best?

#1PhoenixRushPosted 7/31/2014 8:43:51 AM
The i7 and such are 4 core and go up to 4.0 GHz. AMD-FX 9590 is 8 core and 4.70 GHz. So why is Intel better with less power for gaming? I'm really trying to figure out what to put in a prebuilt because I suck at even changing a graphics card.
#2Lemur_HPosted 7/31/2014 8:46:55 AM
AMD's cores are inferior and most games won't use more than four cores anyways.
#3Lucavi000Posted 7/31/2014 8:48:42 AM
It's all about architecture. Intel is just better.
#4PhilOnDezPosted 7/31/2014 8:51:58 AM
Also their cores aren't cores. They're integer processing units. What intel calls a core is a floating point unit and an integer processing unit. It's everything you need to complete a calculation. An IPU can't do anything on its own but AMD still calls them cores. They also refer to GCN clusters as cores in their APUs, they advertise the 7850k a 12 core. By intel's standards it would be a 2 core (by AMD's standards a desktop i5 would be a 5 core)
---
Every time I try to go where I really wanna be it's already where I am, 'cuz I'm already there
XBL, PSN, Steam, Origin, BSN, GFAQs, MC: PhilOnDez
#5PhoenixRush(Topic Creator)Posted 7/31/2014 8:56:43 AM
To be honest I don't want the absolute most expensive everything. I want something that outperforms PS4/XB1 running most everything in high settings at 60 FPS or so. I am not sure what the best build for this would be as I'm new to all of this still.
#6XSoldERPosted 7/31/2014 9:01:34 AM
Cause a lot of games are not coded to make use of all the cores and since Intel cores are more efficient (faster on an individual basis) so it's not surprising that games do better on Intel. The gap is a lot closer with production software cause they are coded to use as many as you have.

And in no way is an I7 (assuming a 4770K) weaker than an FX-9590, amount of cores and clock speed are meaningless when the architecture in them is totally different.
#7SonyHoundDawgPosted 7/31/2014 9:09:21 AM
TC, for a gaming CPU you want probably at least a 4 core. Doesn't have to be the best. But don't get some old junk either.

Your GPU is where the main gaming power is going to come from what you should be most concerned about.
#8ghostemp77Posted 7/31/2014 9:31:20 AM
Only consider AMD if you intend to stream game videos; otherwise Intel should be your choice of CPU.
---
3DS FC: 2380 - 2356 - 0444
http://i.imgur.com/dovxshz.gif http://i.imgur.com/akOmHDE.png
#9reincarnator07Posted 7/31/2014 12:48:46 PM
Not all cores are equal. AMD's cores aren't as powerful as Intel's cores. Even at a higher clockspeed, AMD struggles to compete with Intel in power per core. In addition, not all software makes use of all of your cores. It's only quite recently that games are regularly taking advantage of more than 2 cores and it's still not as common as we would like.
---
Fan of metal? Don't mind covers? Check out my youtube and give me some feedback
http://www.youtube.com/sircaballero
#10ClouddxPosted 7/31/2014 1:32:10 PM(edited)
PhoenixRush posted...
To be honest I don't want the absolute most expensive everything. I want something that outperforms PS4/XB1 running most everything in high settings at 60 FPS or so. I am not sure what the best build for this would be as I'm new to all of this still.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MOAN005Fvw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f6INgYBmGo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSYTMhDoMS8

The first two will run games better than a PS4/XB1. The last one is just a super cheap PC that will play games, but on lower settings. Instead of the 650 ti Boost you can get an MSI 750ti for $119.99.

Here's a $600 build: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfGE4i_A6E4 this will absolutely DESTROY a PS4/XB1 in terms of performance.

P.S. Neither the PS4 or X1 play games @ 60fps(other than a select few).
---
i7-920 @ 3.6 // 770 GTX // 12 GB G.Skill Sniper Ram // PS3 // 360
FiiO e9+17 // AD700 + M50 // Deck Legend + 82 // DAS Ultimate S