home / Installation and configuration/ How to choose a processor for a home pc, a review of the best models. Which processor is better: AMD or Intel? Amd processor selection

How to choose a processor for your home pc, a review of the best models. Which processor is better: AMD or Intel? Amd processor selection

This article presents only the best AMD processors in 2017.

If you do not want to independently understand all the characteristics of each processor model or are not sure what you can choose the best way, take a look at our CPU rating from AMD.

Content:

A good processor is the main indicator of power and. AMD is one of the leaders in the processor market.

AMD produces the following types of processors:

Cpu - central computing units
GPU - a separate device that renders video. Often used in gaming computers to reduce the load on the central unit and to provide best quality video sequence;
APU - central processors with built-in video accelerator. They are also called hybrid, because such a component is central and in one crystal.

# 5 - Athlon X4 860K

Ruler AMD Athlon designed for Socket FM2 +. The X4 860K is the best and most performing model of the entire series, to which three processors go:

Athlon X4 860K;
Athlon X4840;
and model Athlon X2.

The Athlon family is designed for desktop personal computers. All models in the line are distinguished by good multithreading.

The best results in the Athlon group were shown by the X4 860K.

The first detail to be noted is support for practically, which consumes no more than 95 watts along with quiet operation and no performance loss.

If the processor has been overclocked using special programs, an increase in the noise in the operation of the cooling system may be observed.

Main characteristics:

Family: Athlon X4;
The number of processor cores: 4;
Clock frequency - 3.1 MHz;
There is no unlocked multiplier;
Core type: Kaveri;
Estimated cost: $ 50.

There is no integrated graphics in the CPU.

The X4 860K processor can only support fast general-purpose systems.

CPU testing was done using the AIDA64 utility. Overall, the model performs well for a mid-range processor.

If you're looking for a low-cost, multitasking CPU for your home computer, the Athlon X4 860K is one of the options.

Athlon X4 860K testing

No. 4 - AMD FX-6300

AMD's FX-6300 is a Piledriver based CPU. Processors with such an architecture have already become worthy competitors to new products from Intel.

All processors from AMD FX group have excellent overclocking potential.

FX-6300 specifications:

Series: FX-Series;
Supported Socket: Socket AM3 +;
Number of cores: 6;
No integrated graphics
The clock frequency is 3.5 MHz;
Number of contacts: 938;
The average cost of the model is $ 85.

A characteristic feature of the processor is its flexibility.

The clock frequency declared by the developer is 3.5 MHz, which is a rather mediocre figure among.

However, this CPU is capable of overclocking up to 4.1 MHz.

box of FX series devices from AMD

Acceleration of work occurs during intense loads. More often during video rendering or playing games.

It should be noted that this CPU model is equipped with a dual channel memory controller.

Processor performance tests were conducted in Just Cause 2.

The final results showed that the Athlon X4 860K supports the maximum graphics resolution of 1920 x 1200 pixels.

The computer also used an integrated GTX 580 graphics card.

In the figure below, you can see a comparative analysis of the performance of other processors that were tested with identical conditions of the software and hardware environment.

test result Athlon X4 860K

No. 3 - A10-7890K

The A10-7890K is a hybrid CPU from AMD. Despite the announcement of the development of a fundamentally new technology and a generation of processors, AMD decided to release another model of the A10 line.

The company is positioning this series of devices as a great choice for desktop PCs.

The A10-7890K is a best-in-class playback solution.

Of course, the graphics settings will have to be reduced, but as a result, you will get good performance without severe overheating of the PC hardware.

packing model A10-7890K

This processor has an integrated Radeon graphics unit that allows you to:

The processor comes with a Wraith cooler, which features very quiet operation. Also, the cooler supports backlighting mode. Specifications A10-7890K:

CPU family - A-Series;
Clock frequency: 4.1 MHz;
Connector type: Socket FM2 +;
Number of cores: 4 cores;
There is an unlocked multiplier;
Number of contacts: 906;
Estimated cost - $ 130.

The main plus of the A10-7890K is its improved interoperability with Windows 10.

The detailed characteristics of the processor are shown in the figure below:

detailed characteristics of APU A10-7890K

The results of testing a component with a standard test:

Cinebench R15 test result

As you can see, the tested component has surpassed some AMD models in the A-10 and Athlon line in its parameters.

At the same time, the results obtained were not enough to surpass Intel analogs in terms of speed.

# 2 - Ryzen 5 1600X

The first two places in our TOP are occupied by models of the Ryzen line. It is in the past few years that the architecture of these processors has become a key one for Advanced Micro Devices Corporation.

The presented Zen microarchitecture is gradually returning the manufacturer to its leading position in the market.

Ryzen 5 is a direct competitor for the group's processors. The CPU is at its best in gaming systems. This is also stated by the CEO of AMD.

Specifications:

AMD Ryzen 5 family;
6 cores;
No integrated graphics;
There is an unlocked multiplier;
Clock frequency 3.6 MHz;
Socket AM4;
The cost is about $ 260.

Most of the 1600X modifications are devoid of a native one. Users will have to purchase this component separately.

The base frequencies do not cross the established 3.6 MHz mark. When working in turbo mode (as a result of overclocking the processor), the clock frequency reaches 4.0 MHz.

All 5th Gen Ryzen models support SMT - Surface Mount Technology.

Thus, the CPU can be easily mounted on the surface of the PCB without the need to cut parts of the component.

Ryzen 5 package

In the process of testing the CPU even with the most resource-intensive programs, the maximum CPU temperature did not exceed 58 degrees. , Test results:

test of work of model 1600X

Together with a line of powerful digging CPUs, AMD also released a special firmware for their initial configuration - AGESA.

The utility allows you to reconfigure memory to avoid delays and interruptions in work.

# 1 - Ryzen 7 1800X

The Ryzen 7 1800X is a great choice for building a powerful PC or for multi-tiered data server support.

V currently AMD is developing another powerful member of the Ryzen family.

In March 2017, the Ryzen 2000 X APU was announced and should go on sale by the end of the year.

Specifications:

Family: AMD Ryzen 7;
8 cores;
Clock frequency of 3.6 MHz with the possibility of overclocking to 4 MHz;
Unlocked multiplier support;
No support for integrated graphics;
Average price - $ 480.

1800X can simultaneously execute up to 16 streams of program code. The processor works with SMT multithreading technology.

All Zen kernels ensure the efficient use of others. Increased throughput with support for three-level cache memory.

Comparison of test results Ryzen 7 1800X with competitive models from Intel.

The past year could well be declared the year of central processors. Announcements of this kind of fresh produce in 2017 were more frequent than ever. Moreover, we are really talking about the emergence of fundamentally new chips, and not just another cosmetic change and a small increase in clock frequencies. As a result, while for the past several years the final articles about the market of processors for personal computers had to be literally tortured, with difficulty trying to remember at least something worthy of attention, last year gave so many hot topics that it was simply not clear what to grab onto. ... Plots poured from a cornucopia.

Last year began with the announcement of the Kaby Lake processor family, which can hardly be called any outstanding novelty. But then it burst out. The company set the tone for AMD, which began to churn out fundamentally new solutions, built on the Zen microarchitecture, one after another. Ryzen 7, 5, 3, and then the Threadripper processors were the winds of change that could stir up an industry in the computer market that has long been considered stable or even stagnant.

At the same time, last year was not a benefit for AMD. Intel also presented many interesting products. The microprocessor giant completely updated its high-performance HEDT platform and released the Skylake-X processor family, which acquired not only standard processors for this segment with 6-10 computing cores, but also monster chips like the Core i9-7980XE with up to 18 cores. In addition, this platform has become easier to "enter", as relatively inexpensive processors with the Kaby Lake-X design began to be produced for it. The current mainstream Intel platform has also undergone major changes. With an eye on it, the company now has six-core Coffee Lake in its assortment, which debuted along with the updated LGA1151 processor socket (second version) and 300-series chipsets.

Thus, without much difficulty, we were able to recall at least six announcements of last year, which can be called cornerstone, and after all, the matter is not limited to them. For comparison: in 2016, only one new family of CPUs came to the market - Intel Broadwell-E, and in 2015 the only noticeable event on the processor market was the release of Skylake processors and the LGA1151 platform (the first version). AMD, in the previous couple of years, was able to mark only by launching the Godawari family of hybrid processors, which not only did not bring anything fundamentally new, but also could not even offer a better level of performance compared to the 2012 Piledriver FX processors.

This example perfectly shows how much the disposition has changed in the processor market. And if you are only interested in computer games, then the changes that have occurred can still be ignored somehow, since many old processors are still capable of providing acceptable performance in tasks of this type. But in the case of work with intensive loads, in particular with the creation or processing of digital content, the situation is completely different. Here, in 2017, users received opportunities on a fundamentally new level: the conservative processor market in the past was able to become a source for a noticeable acceleration of work processes.

It's no exaggeration to say that this is a golden age for performance enthusiasts. Intel, which claims to hold onto the crown of the fastest desktop processors, can now offer the Core i9-7980XE and Core i9-7960X CPUs with nearly double the number of cores in any desktop chip released prior to 2017. AMD has in its arsenal the Threadripper - a processor with similar characteristics, but selling for half the price, which is impressive in itself.

Many interesting offers have appeared in more mundane price segments. There are a myriad of fresh options for upgrading the PC platform. A series of tumultuous events in the processor market led us to the fact that today, with the same costs as a year ago, you can get at your disposal about one and a half times more performance configuration... I think this is an excellent occasion to refresh your memory as everything happened.

It is unlikely that anyone would argue with the fact that the main processor event in the past year was the appearance of the AMD Ryzen family built on the Zen microarchitecture. As we can now say with complete confidence, these processors were able to return AMD to the number of suppliers of chips for performance computers, which rekindled competition and pushed progress in this area. It is generally accepted that it is thanks to AMD that we came to the conclusion that mass processors of the upper price segment began to receive more than four processor cores at their disposal. And although this is not entirely true, such a rapid development of events would certainly not have happened without AMD.

In other words, the "Ryzen effect" is a completely objective fact and a great success for AMD, which has not pleased us with any noteworthy performance innovations for a very long time. In the process of developing the underlying Zen microarchitecture of Ryzen processors, AMD engineers abandoned all of their past legacy. New processors received fundamentally new design, which has nothing to do with Bulldozer - the original microarchitecture, which never managed to justify the hopes placed on it. At Zen, engineers decided to revert to the classic "wide" cores, and this reflects a radical change in AMD's understanding of the basis on which modern x86 processors should rely.

Chips built on the Zen microarchitecture switched to a modern 14-nm FinFET process, became noticeably more economical (up to 3.5 times), and due to a complete redesign of the executive pipeline, they got the ability to execute more instructions per clock (IPC advantage over recent generations of Bulldozer reaches 52 percent). Zen kernels now support SMT technology, which allows two threads to run in parallel on one core. The cache memory subsystem has been completely redesigned, and support for DDR4 SDRAM has been introduced.

At the same time, not having the resources of Intel, AMD incorporated two very important things into the Zen project: high efficiency and modularity. Thanks to the first feature, the Zen microarchitecture made it possible to create relatively compact computing cores that outperform the competitor's solutions in terms of the area occupied on a semiconductor crystal by almost one and a half times. In terms of modularity, processors with Zen microarchitecture are somewhat reminiscent of Bulldozer. However, in Zen, the basic building block CCX (Core Complex) consists of four rather than two cores, and at the same time does not have any shareable parts other than the L3 cache.

It is these properties inherent in Zen design that have allowed AMD to overtake Intel in the number of processing cores contained in mainstream processors. However, you need to understand that the eight-core Ryzen did not appear from a good life. By increasing the number of cores, AMD compensates for the lower specific performance of the microarchitecture, designed to execute four instructions per clock, while modern competitor processors can process up to five x86 instructions in parallel on a single core. There are other weaknesses in Zen, too. For example, new AMD processors are significantly inferior to Intel ones when working with vector instructions from the AVX2 set.

In addition, the modularity of Ryzen also brought with it a fair amount of negativity, since the scheme for combining quad-core modules chosen by AMD engineers is not very high transaction speed. Communication between the cores is provided by a 256-bit proprietary two-way Infinity Fabric bus, which operates at the same frequency as the memory controller. And very often, in those tasks that involve intensive inter-core interaction, the responsiveness of such a bus is not enough. That is why there are entire classes of applications in which users have well-founded claims about Ryzen's performance. Processor-dependent games belong to one of these classes - in them the performance of new AMD processors is generally worse than that of Intel competitors.

But thanks to modularity, AMD, using the same Zeppelin semiconductor crystal with two modules and eight cores, was able to prepare and bring to the market an extensive family of consumer products: eight-core Ryzen 7, six-core and four-core Ryzen 5, as well as four-core Ryzen 3 with disabled SMT technology and stripped-down cache memory. Moreover, the distribution of these processors by price segments was made in such a way that each of them, in comparison with Intel competitors, offers more advanced multicore and multithreading.

The chosen strategy gave very good results. Besides, what about AMD's return to the market? desktop systems both experts and ordinary users began to speak seriously, the company was able to gradually begin to win back its market share. AMD now controls roughly 13 percent of the desktop processor market, up from 2.5 percent to three percent more than a year ago, according to the latest published analytics. If we translate these indicators into absolute numbers, then we can say that over the past year AMD was able to increase sales in comparison with 2016 by about one and a half million processors. That being said, it should be emphasized that in the upper price segment, where Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5 are fighting against the processors of the Core i7 and Core i5 series, the current share of AMD is even higher and exceeds 15 percent.

The fact that the older Ryzen processors are attracting the attention of enthusiasts is evidenced by the very positive sales data for AMD, which are shared by major retailers. For example, the German retailer Mindfactory.de claims that Ryzen 5 1600 remains the most popular desktop CPU for several months in a row. And the American online store Amazon.com puts Ryzen 5 1600 in fourth place in sales statistics, right after overclocking Core i7 and Core i5 of the latest generations.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper

AMD's graceful approach to scaling its solutions, where a single semiconductor crystal with two quad-core Zen modules can be found in any of the desktop processors, allowed the company to achieve minimum rejection. Most of the blanks AMD receives from its manufacturing partner, GlobalFoundries, find their way into some kind of processor in one way or another. For example, partially inoperable crystals can be used in the younger Ryzen 3, where it is supposed to disable half of the cores and half of the cache memory.

A similar unification works in the other direction. Zeppelin semiconductor crystals can be used not only in a CPU with eight or fewer processing cores. It is also possible to combine them into clusters to form processors with more than eight cores. The EPYC server processors are based on this principle: four Zeppelin crystals are installed in them at once, which allows AMD to release solutions based on the Zen microarchitecture with up to 32 cores. combining modules in one crystal - via the Infinity Fabric bus. Physically, the crystals are assembled into a single whole within the framework of one processor package - under the processor cover in EPYC there are four crystals at once.

Although server processors are not the direct subject of this material, we had to start talking about them because AMD decided to adopt Intel's approach to the release of high-performance desktop solutions and, based on the EPYC design, prepare a separate Ryzen Threadripper HEDT platform. However, unlike Intel's HEDT processors, which are usually close counterparts to server and workstation products, Ryzen Threadripper is a somewhat stand-alone product. It has its own infrastructure (Socket TR4 platform), and in terms of design, such processors are seriously different from their server counterparts. While EPYCs are an amalgamation of four Zeppelin crystals, Ryzen Threadripper at the logical level is formed from only a couple of such building blocks. As a result, Ryzen Threadripper has a maximum core count of sixteen, but it is also a great work tool for digital content creators.

Using two Zeppelin dies for the Ryzen Threadripper doubles the capabilities of this processor, not only in terms of support for multithreaded computing, but also in terms of expandability. As a result, a platform based on such processors acquires all the features necessary for productive workstations. Ryzen Threadripper systems can use 4-channel DDR4 SDRAM, and the number of PCI Express 3.0 processor lines increases to 60, which allows you to form powerful multi-GPU configurations or disk arrays composed of NVMe drives. From this position, Ryzen Threadripper is even better than Intel's HEDT offerings.

But the biggest advantage of Ryzen Threadripper lies in the price. AMD has made its HEDT platform much more affordable than Intel's counterparts and offers a 16-core processor 40 percent cheaper than a competitor's 16-core. It is thanks to the favorable price that Ryzen Threadripper is in good demand among professionals. As the sales statistics show, the older 16-core Ryzen Treadripper 1950X is being sold in a noticeably large quantities than the older multi-core processors of the Core i9 family.

It is curious that, despite all that has been said, initially AMD was not going to release Ryzen Threadripper. Such processors appeared thanks to the private initiative of individual employees of the company, who were engaged in the development of a multi-core consumer solution based on the Zen microarchitecture in their spare time. However, its creation in the end did not require too much effort. In terms of hardware design, Ryzen Threadripper is as unified as possible with EPYC server processors. For example, Ryzen Threadripper processor packaging is similar to EPYC: in reality, it contains four semiconductor crystals inside it, a pair of which is blocked during production.

AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen Mobile)

Despite the fact that processors for mobile computers are not the subject of this material (you can read about them in other "results"), we could not ignore Ryzen Mobile. The fact is that this is a fundamentally different product from the existing Ryzen desktop products, which has noticeable architectural features. In addition, over the coming months, Ryzen Mobile will have desktop twins - APUs, codenamed Raven Ridge.

At the moment, AMD has introduced two Ryzen processors classified as mobile. They have similar desktop model names Ryzen 7 2700U and Ryzen 5 2500U, but at the same time they are seriously different from the usual representatives of Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5. There are two reasons for such differences. First off, Ryzen Mobile is an APU equipped with an integrated graphics core based on the most advanced Vega architecture. Secondly, mobile carriers of the Zen microarchitecture are inscribed in a narrow 15-watt frame. When AMD was just about to release a new generation of its processors, its representatives argued that the Zen microarchitecture has enviable versatility and can be used in processors of different classes without any problems. Ryzen Mobile illustrates this vividly: as you can see, there were no problems with the introduction of Zen into energy-efficient laptop processors.

However, you need to keep in mind that mobile Ryzen have only four cores with Hyper-Threading support, that is, they are based on one CCX module. Moreover, CCX in this case is somewhat different than in Zeppelin. The cache memory of the third level in it has been cut in half - to 4 MB. However, due to the fact that mobile processors have a Vega GPU with 11 computing units embedded in the crystal (some of them are deactivated in the Ryzen 7 2700U and Ryzen 5 2500U), its area is approximately equal to the area of the eight-core Zeppelin. This means that at a cost price, quad-core mobile APUs are not more profitable than desktop processors.

Despite the low power consumption and heat dissipation, Ryzen Mobile boasts good clock speeds. The base is set at 2.0-2.2 GHz, but the turbo is very aggressive and can push the clock up to the typical desktop 3.8 GHz. The graphics core operates at a frequency of 1.1-1.3 GHz.

The described characteristics allow you to roughly imagine what capabilities desktop APUs based on the Zen microarchitecture will get. Obviously, their thermal package will be expanded to 35-65 W, which will allow increasing the base frequency of such processors up to 3 GHz and higher, but as far as the size of the cache memory and the parameters of the graphics core are concerned, changes are hardly possible here. This means that in terms of processor performance, desktop Raven Ridge will be a cross between Ryzen 3 and Ryzen 5. However, in order for a new generation APU for desktop computers compared with existing solutions were able to increase productivity several times, this is quite enough.

AMD Bristol Ridge

Raven Ridge processors for the desktop segment have not yet been officially announced, and expect this event worth only the coming spring. However, this does not mean at all that the Socket AM4 platform released this year has not yet received its APUs. It just needs to be borne in mind that the Bristol Ridge processors with an integrated GPU currently offered for this role, although released quite recently, are based on an outdated design: their computing cores have the Excavator microarchitecture, and the graphics belong to the GCN 1.3 generation (that is, Fury ).

Thus, the first generation APU, which appeared in the fresh Socket AM4 desktop platform, is a re-release of the Carrizo APUs that AMD has been offering as mobile solutions since mid-2015. The only significant difference between the new hybrid processors and their prototype from the past is related to the implementation of compatibility with a more modern platform. To do this, Bristol Ridge has added a new memory controller that supports DDR4 SDRAM.

It turns out that Bristol Ridge-designed APUs are unlikely to attract enthusiasts. It is enough just to mention that such APUs are the last resting place of the Bulldozer architecture. And although certain minor optimizations are made in the Excavator kernels, in terms of performance they are very close to the previous versions of this microarchitecture. To this we must add that the number of computing cores in Bristol Ridge is limited to four, plus such processors do not have a third-level cache at all. To clearly imagine how depressing performance such a configuration can give, it is worth recalling that when talking about Zen's 52% advantage over previous microarchitectures, AMD meant just a comparison with Excavator.

The external interfaces implemented in Bristol Ridge processors are not encouraging either. The DDR4 memory controller in them is very slow, seriously losing in latency to the controller of Ryzen processors and not knowing how to work with any high-speed DDR4 SDRAM modules. The bus for connecting discrete graphics accelerators in Bristol Ridge is presented only in a form cut down to PCI Express 3.0 x8.

The only bright spot in the Bristol Ridge design is the integrated graphics, which in the older versions of these processors has 512 stream processors with GCN 1.3 architecture and operates at frequencies exceeding 1 GHz. Thanks to this, Bristol Ridge surpasses the Kaveri design carriers (Godavari) and can boast the title of desktop APU with the most powerful graphics core at the moment. However, it is obvious that this title will be taken away from them as soon as the Raven Ridge processors in Socket AM4 come to the market.

Apparently, initially AMD did not intend to launch Bristol Ridge for public sale at all due to the obvious backwardness of their architecture. Such processors were to be distributed on special orders among OEM-partners. But later the company decided to present to the public a limited model range of desktop Bristol Ridge in order to somehow justify the presence of video outputs on most Socket AM4 boards. Nevertheless, they did not attract any noticeable attention to themselves, which, however, is quite natural.

Intel Kaby Lake

Intel kicked off last year with the Kaby Lake family of mainstream processors, but the event has received little attention. The thing is that Kaby Lake should be called Skylake Refresh, because the new family turned out to be not so new, but only a cosmetic update of the previous design aimed at common desktop systems. However, we cannot but pay attention to this step in the final article. Despite the fact that there are only one or two technical improvements in Kaby Lake, from an organizational point of view, these processors mean a lot.

First, the arrival of Kaby Lake heralded the untimely demise of Intel's tick-tock principle, according to which the transition to new manufacturing technologies alternated with the renewal of the microarchitecture. In Kaby Lake, neither the one nor the other happened, and Intel announced the transition to a new sequence of stages in the development of their CPUs: "process - architecture - optimization." However, as it became clear later, the company is not able to maintain such a rhythm, and by now everything has slipped into iterative optimization without introducing new technical processes and introducing new microarchitectures, the end and edge of which is not yet visible. But we'll talk about this later.

As for the optimization in Kaby Lake, for the production of these processors, Intel launched an improved manufacturing process with a resolution of 14+ nm, which, due to changes in the semiconductor structure of transistors, slightly pushed the frequency potential of the chips. As a result, members of the Kaby Lake family compared to Skylake were able to get about 200 MHz higher clock speeds and proportionally increased performance. Achievements of overclocking models have grown approximately within the same limits, although, as before, Intel added a headache to enthusiasts, continuing to use its proprietary polymer thermal interface under the processor cover.

The second fundamental point is that when introducing the Kaby Lake lineup to the market, Intel made a serious emphasis on further improving the characteristics of inexpensive processors. In the Core i3 series, for the first time in the history of the microprocessor giant, an overclocking model with a free multiplier appeared. And the Pentium series unexpectedly found support for Hyper-Threading technology, which in the eyes of the vast majority of users put it on a par with the Core i3. Indeed, the difference between these variations of the chips was almost completely erased: Compared to the updated Pentium of the Kaby Lake generation, the Core i3 could only offer slightly higher frequencies and support for AVX instructions, which the Pentium does not have. As a result, the new dual-core, four-thread Pentiums immediately became extremely successful processors for low-cost gaming systems.

In fairness, we need to mention one addition at the architecture level, which nevertheless found a place in Kaby Lake. True, we are talking only about the graphics core of these processors. In them, Intel was able to expand multimedia capabilities: the new GPU, classified by the developers as the 9.5 generation, received full support hardware acceleration HEVC 4K video encoding and decoding with Main10 profile. In Skylake processors, this support was partially implemented by the driver and involved the computational cores, but now everything began to work without any load on the processor resources at all.

Intel Coffee Lake

In 2017, Intel also managed to carry out the second "act of optimization" of the Skylake processor design. Just nine months after Kaby Lake hit the market, the next generation of mainstream chips, Coffee Lake, was launched. As in the previous step, no microarchitectural improvements were made in this case, and from the point of view of the structure of computing cores, Coffee Lake continues to be complete analogues of Skylake. Only the process technology has changed again. It still uses 14nm resolution, but the next "tightening" of the structure of the transistors has given another increase in their efficiency. As a result, Intel has the right to speak about the re-improved technical process with the norms of 14 ++ nm, which paved the way for another extensive step in increasing the performance of proposed mass solutions.

But this time, the developers did not focus on increasing clock speeds. Development took a different path - along the path of increasing parallelism and multithreading, for which additional computing cores were added to Coffee Lake. Intel has completely revised its entire lineup and decided that, starting in the second half of 2017, the main striking force that will be thrown on the mass market segment should be processors with six processing cores, previously offered by the company only for the HEDT platform.

As a result, the Core i7 series, which until now included processors with four cores and support for execution of up to eight threads simultaneously, became six-core and, thanks to the preservation of Hyper-Threading technology, twelve threads. The Core i5 series, which previously combined quad-cores without Hyper-Threading, now includes simple six-cores without multithreading support. And the name Core i3 with the introduction of the Coffee Lake design was given to quad-core processors without Hyper-Threading, completely similar to the representatives of the Core i5 series of the Kaby Lake generation. It is also important that the actual clock frequencies of the updated processors have hardly decreased, which was largely due to both the new 14 ++ nm technical process and the aggressive Turbo Boost 2.0 technology.

Ultimately, Coffee Lake was able to provide a very noticeable leap in performance. While usually, when changing generations of mainstream Intel processors, the speed gain was at the level of 5-10 percent, Coffee Lake was able to offer about a 40 percent superiority over the predecessors of the Kaby Lake family. It is believed that AMD forced the microprocessor giant to take such an unprecedented step. Indeed, the Ryzen processors that it began to offer in the mainstream segment have four to eight cores, so some kind of response from Intel would have to follow. However, in reality, the development of six-core Coffee Lake began long before Ryzen entered the market, and, most likely, the decision about the urgent need to add cores to mass processors Intel took independently. But what the "Ryzen effect" influenced for sure is the time frame in which Coffee Lake was brought to market.

The Coffee Lake announcement was pushed forward by several months, and this created a lot of problems for the new products. The most important one is that Intel was unable to organize the supply of Coffee Lake in the required volumes. New processors are still in short supply: a far from complete model range is available for sale, and the chips that reach the shelves are sold at inflated prices. This noticeably restrains the growth in popularity and distribution of Coffee Lake, which, despite all their attractiveness, are still losing out on sales to AMD's offerings.

There is one more problem. Simultaneously with the announcement of Coffee Lake, Intel was going to update the entire platform, for which it was planned to release a new line of logic sets with improved features like USB support 3.1 Gen 2 and a built-in 802.11ac WiFi controller. However, the development of these chipsets dragged on, and Intel had to urgently construct a "makeshift" - a new Z370 chipset made of Z270. This set of system logic is the only variant that is compatible with Coffee Lake so far. For this reason, the spectrum motherboards for new processors is very limited, and they all have a fairly high cost. This factor, along with a shortage of CPUs, seriously hinders the spread of inexpensive modifications of Coffee Lake: motherboards for budget processors of other families can be purchased almost half the price.

Along the way, serious questions arose regarding the reasons for the incompatibility of Coffee Lake with earlier platforms. Intel argues that the need for the new boards is driven by the increased power requirements of processors with increased cores. However, motherboard manufacturers deny this and refer to the fact that the incompatibility is completely artificial. Moreover, there are even examples of successful launch of new processors on old motherboards. Because of this, Coffee Lake's reputation was somewhat tarnished from the very beginning.

However, the situation should change over time. In theory, Coffee Lake does look very tempting, and once the CPU and motherboard availability issues are resolved, buyers will surely appreciate the price / performance ratio that is so interesting. Apparently, this will happen sometime in March. At least for this period, the release of Coffee Lake and the accompanying platform was originally planned.

Intel Skylake-X

In addition to the intensified development of the basic desktop platform, which, in the absence of clear progress in the implementation of new technological processes and without introducing any microarchitectural improvements, was updated two times last year, Intel also brought to the market a new premium platform LGA2066, which belongs to the HEDT class. As before, the processors for it were designed according to server templates, but in the new design of Skylake-X, when transferring server developments to the desktop platform, the company went much further than usual.

Until now, for HEDT processors, it was customary to use only the simplest version of the Xeon semiconductor crystal, which had the smallest number of computational cores. Therefore, older processors for high-performance desktop systems until 2017 could offer their owners no more than 8 or 10 computing cores. Everything changed last year. Now Intel has considered it possible to admit desktop users not only to the junior (LCC), but also to the middle (HCC) version of the Xeon semiconductor crystal. This immediately put the new Intel HEDT platform in a special position, because the Skylake-X processor lineup included not only eight- and ten-core processors, but also more serious chips with up to 18 cores.

To commemorate this event, Intel even launched a new Core i9 processor line, which includes offerings with more than ten cores. But the emergence of a new name is not the only surprise that Intel marketers have decided to coincide with the release of multi-core processors. The second surprise was in the pricing policy. With the release of Skylake-X, the bar for the maximum cost of a desktop CPU has pushed back to two thousand dollars. Considering the serious increase in the number of cores, such a change can hardly be called unfounded, but we have not yet seen such high numbers on the price tags of desktop processors.

The name Skylake-X clearly indicates which microarchitecture such chips are based on. Indeed, the HEDT platform, which traditionally lags behind mass solutions in terms of development rates, has just arrived design, which appeared in the consumer segment in 2015 along with the initial implementation by Intel of the 14-nm process technology. However, this did not prevent engineers from introducing a number of unique innovations at the level of general structure processor. True, it should be borne in mind that these innovations were made to meet the needs of server clients, and their effect in the desktop segment is far from unambiguous.

An example is the change in the scheme for combining cores into one whole. If earlier the cores were connected to an intraprocessor ring bus (Ring Bus), of which two could coexist at once in multi-core processors, in Skylake-X, a mesh network structure superimposed on an array of cores began to be used for inter-core interaction. In theory, this approach makes it possible to simplify data transfer routes during inter-core interactions in multicore chips. However, in practice, the benefits of new scheme connections is manifested only in processors on the HCC crystal, and in ten-core or even simpler CPUs, it, on the contrary, increases the latency.

The second important change concerns the cache memory subsystem. The size of the individual L2 cache for each core in Skylake-X has been increased from the usual 256 KB to 1 MB, but instead of a single L3 cache for the entire processor, it has approximately halved - now its volume is calculated at the rate of 1.375 MB for each core. Along with this, the algorithm of the third-level cache has also changed: it has become non-inclusive and victimized, which ultimately should increase the efficiency of the caching system without increasing the size of the semiconductor crystal.

It should be added that, along with the multi-core Skylake-X processors, a pair of quad-core processors with the Kaby Lake-X design were also released for the LGA 2066 platform. According to their characteristics, they are close analogs of conventional Kaby Lake overclockers for mass systems and therefore do not have the opportunity to take advantage of the HEDT platform such as four-channel memory and an increased number of PCI Express lanes. Therefore, after the appearance of Coffee Lake, Kaby Lake-X design carriers lost all attractiveness and did not manage to gain any noticeable popularity.

The past year has been unusually rich in processor innovations. Moreover, it is not at all formal and not about "plus five percent": in 2017, chips for desktop computers made a very noticeable step forward both in terms of architecture, and in terms of performance and capabilities. It is quite natural that processor developers will hardly be able to extend such a high rate and such a high concentration of innovations for another year. Therefore, it is hardly worth expecting the same rich cycle of events from 2018. In the coming twelve months, everything is likely to be limited to evolutionary changes.

In the first half of this year, AMD should finally bring the Raven Ridge processors to the desktop segment and enable the Socket AM4 platform to become truly universal. The APUs that AMD is offering for this platform now do not stand up to scrutiny. The promising Raven Ridge are based on the modern Zen microarchitecture, and this should allow them to become a worthy alternative to Intel's Core i3 and Pentium in applications where a powerful video accelerator is not required. Thanks to this, the AMD platform should regain its right to be used in office and multimedia computers, which is quite capable of becoming another impetus for the increase in this manufacturer's market share.

In addition, around March, we expect to see updated versions of Ryzen processors, which so far flash in the news under the codename Pinnacle Ridge. The main reason for their appearance will be the transfer of the Zen microarchitecture to a 12-nm process technology, which was launched in the spring of last year in the 12LP (Leading-Performance) version by AMD's production partner, GlobalFoundries. It is believed that along with this, Ryzen processors will be able to get higher clock speeds and some additional optimizations, such as an improved memory controller.

As for Intel, in the first half of the year it should solve all the problems inherent in Coffee Lake. The model range should be expanded, regular deliveries should be stabilized, and prices should be brought in line with the official price list. In addition, in the same period, the announcement of a full set of system logic sets of the three hundredth series is expected, which should give the green light to the appearance of inexpensive motherboards with support for Coffee Lake.

There is no clarity about the further update of mass Intel processors for the desktop segment. The current versions of Intel's plans do not promise any replacement for the Coffee Lake design throughout 2018, but at the same time it is known that in the second half of the year in mobile computers Whiskey Lake processors will have to arrive, which will be the third Skylake optimization, produced on the 14 +++ nm process technology. At the same time, the new 10nm technology, which was originally planned by the microprocessor giant for implementation at the end of 2015, together with Ice Lake processors will be able to appear in desktop chips no earlier than 2019.

Consequently, the only Intel desktop novelty in 2018 may be the Cascade Lake-X processors for the high-performance HEDT platform. Intel plans to release them in the fourth quarter. However, they should not bring with them any special changes, because the design of Cascade Lake-X is a simple Skylake optimization, made by switching to a 14+ nm process technology.

However, we will surely find something to argue about during 2018. For example, in the first quarter, the microprocessor giant promises to deliver incredible Core processors H, in which four cores with a Kaby Lake design will coexist with an integrated AMD Vega graphics accelerator and HBM2 memory. So far, not too much is known about these unexpected solutions, and the most we know for sure is that they are focused on gaming laptops and compact NUC-class systems. However, the example of such cooperation between AMD and Intel looks very encouraging in itself and shows that for the sake of progress, technology companies can form the most unexpected alliances. In general, it will definitely not be boring.

1. A bit of history
2. Pricing policy
3. Opportunities for overclocking
4. Processor for computer games
5. Final instructions

Every computer, no matter how it is used, has the same basic components. The main element in any PC is the processor, which performs all computational operations, and the performance of the system as a whole depends on the performance of this small detail. Only two companies are fighting for leadership in the processor market, which we will talk about today and try to answer the age-old question - AMD or Intel, which is better?

A bit of history

Both companies began their journey in an era when computers occupied entire rooms, and the concept of a personal computer was just beginning to come into vogue. The first in this field was the Intel company, created in 1968 and became practically the only developer and manufacturer of processes. The brand's original products were integrated circuits, but pretty soon the manufacturer focused only on processors. AMD was founded in 1969 and was originally focused on the process market.

At that time, AMD processors became a product that appeared with the active interaction of two manufacturers. Intel's technical department strongly supported the young competitor and shared technologies and patents. After the company was firmly on its feet, the paths of manufacturers parted in different sides, and today the two world manufacturers face each other in each generation of processors.

Price policy

There are many solutions on the market, both from one manufacturer and from another. Taking the side of one company and radically abandoning the other is not so easy, because when choosing a processor, you need to take into account many factors. For starters, it's worth noting that both companies make processors for all uses and for any budget:

Office. Such processors have minimal technical performance and low cost, are designed to run office applications and are not designed for programs with high computing needs.
Homemade. This type of process is usually more powerful than the office version, because it involves a margin of productivity for casual gaming, but the cost of such an element is much higher.
Gaming or professional. Computer games put forward certain requirements for the power of the CPU, and such a processor will cost a tidy sum.

If you are looking for a processor for the job, then AMD offers inexpensive options for "stones" with good technical indicators. The budget line from the manufacturer is distinguished by its low cost, excellent performance and reasonable power consumption. However, Intel products, according to the assurances of all experts, have a much higher power reserve. Thus, for budget computer a processor from AMD is great, but for work in resource-intensive applications, gaming and stable operation of the system in general, it is better to opt for Intel.

Overclocking capabilities

Overclocking is a fairly popular way to increase the performance of your computer without having to buy additional hardware. However, for full overclocking, the processor must have a specific architecture and meet specific requirements.

If the Intel processor is better for gaming, then it is recommended to purchase AMD for overclocking. Unlike its competitor, AMD has created processors that can operate at different clock speeds, which provides ample room for overclocking. At the same time, you can overclock any processor from the line, but Intel allows you to experiment only with some models with the K index in the name. Other processors simply do not support overclocking and cannot change the clock speed.

For those who plan to overclock the PC platform, it is better to buy AMD, which works stably at any frequency. At the same time, such an impact is supported by both expensive eight-core processors and budget options.

Computer gaming processor

Fans of crisp graphics will definitely go for the Intel Core i5 and i7. The latest models from this manufacturer have shown high parameters in the most "difficult" games and do an excellent job of rendering any picture. Such processors are classified as gaming.

However, AMD is not losing ground so easily. Not so long ago, a solution appeared that is great for a budget gaming computer - six-core Ryzen 5 chipsets. The result is an inexpensive and quite productive working platform. Although the verdict still adheres to Intel products, which are recognized the best solution for a gaming computer.

One of the main factors when choosing a processor for gaming is its energy efficiency. Traditionally, Intel processors are better optimized both in terms of power consumption and operating temperatures. Therefore, if you do not want your computer to “warm up like a stove,” it is better to join the blue camp, or save on the processor and take AMD, but in addition buy a powerful cooling system.

Final instructions

In 2019, both companies will unveil a new generation of processors with improved performance. At the moment, the best choice for a home computer in terms of price / quality ratio are two processors - Intel Core i5 and AMD Ryzen 5 1600.

Both stones have approximately the same parameters, but there are some quite obvious differences:

Both stones have the same number of cores, but in the case of AMD, there is the notorious possibility of a fairly simple overclocking. Therefore, for the future, it will fit better, but Intel will work more stably.
The specific format of the RAM. A processor from AMD fully reveals its potential with a certain frequency of RAM, which can create some difficulties. The Intel processor is much more interesting in this regard, because it does not impose such strict restrictions.
The processor from Intel heats up much less, that is, you do not have to spend additional funds on organizing a cooling system. AMD heats up quite a bit and you have to buy a powerful cooler for it.

In any case, offers from all manufacturers have their own advantages and are tailored to meet the definition of tasks. If you have to stick to a tight budget, AMD has an excellent line of low-cost processors. In the event that you want to build a computer that can cope with any task at hand, then there is no better Intel product for this purpose yet.

The question of which processor is better than AMD or Intel does not have an unambiguous answer, because each component has a number of specific parameters and the choice of one or another option should be based on the purpose of the PC itself. An effective platform will demonstrate high performance only with the correct selection of all components that will enhance the performance of each other.

AMD is one of the largest manufacturers of processors for computers and laptops. Today, all personal computers are equipped with processors either from this company or from Intel. For a number of reasons, many users choose one of the two manufacturers, because each has its own advantages. We are now going to take a look at the best AMD processors so that the adherents of this company can find the right model for themselves. The range of developers is impressive, so any user will be able to decide which processor is better to choose for their needs.

No. 10 - AMD A10 Kaveri

Price: 6900 rubles

The AMD A10 Kaveri is a budget quad-core processor that's great if you're looking to build a multimedia or office computer. The model looks great as in the working office computer and in a gaming PC.

For games, the processor will not be the most powerful, but also a worthy solution. It has quite impressive characteristics, but in order to play modern demanding projects at maximum settings, they are not enough.

A separate plus is the function of automatic frequency gain. The processor does not need to be overclocked to get maximum power.

When the need arises, the frequency is automatically increased to the maximum limit, which is especially well felt in games. The A10 has an integrated graphics core.

Of course, its power is not enough to replace a full-fledged video card, but it is enough for everyday tasks and most current online games.

No. 9 - AMD FX-6350 Vishera

Price: 5940 rubles

The AMD FX-6350 Vishera is a six-core, six-thread processor that is great for gaming and other general tasks. The clock speed of the processor was 3.9 GHz, but in turbo mode it reaches 4.2 GHz.

In addition, it is possible to overclock the processor to improve its performance.

The FX-6350 is built using a 32nm technical processor and has an open multiplier. The downside of this solution is the lack of an integrated graphics core, so a video card is required in any case.

Also, if the device is overclocked, then powerful cooling is required to maintain operation. The processor is really hot enough. But if you have good system cooling in the case, you don't have to worry about it.

All in all, the FX-6350 is one of the most powerful options in the budget segment.

AMD FX-6350 Vishera

No. 8 - AMD FX-8320 Vishera

Price: 5630 rubles

If you need more performance for your home PC, you can check out the excellent AMD FX-8320 Vishera 8-core 3.5GHz processor, one of the most powerful processors in AMD's entry-level segment.

This is already a fairly fast processor by itself, but in some situations it is able to reach even higher speeds. In the turbo boost, all eight cores are overclocked to 5 GHz clock speed.

Vector extensions used by AMD also improve performance by increasing speed for particularly heavy applications. For this, floating point calculations are used.

The 8MB L3 cache is another improvement over most other processors, giving the user a great experience. A personal computer will last long enough with this fast, cool and reliable processor and give you the power you need to complete a variety of tasks.

AMD FX-8320 Vishera

# 7 - AMD Ryzen 3 1200

Price: 5640 rubles

Continuing our top processor AMD Ryzen 3 1200. Having passed all the basic tests, this chipset showed very good results, as in general, the entire AMD Ryzen 3 line.

This model will especially appeal to fans of overclocking hardware. With a standard 3.2 GHz, it can be overclocked to 4 GHz, making the 1200 one of the most powerful options in the budget segment.

The Ryzen 3 1200 has received good reviews from customers. This is not surprising, since the model offers high base power and great overclocking potential at a very low price.

It is also a great option if such indicators as operating temperature and power consumption are of fundamental importance for you. Everyone is used to the fact that this is exactly what AMD has the biggest problems with.

But AMD Ryzen 3 1200 consumes quite little power and even under heavy loads it does not heat up to temperatures above 64 degrees.

AMD Ryzen 3 1200

# 6 - AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

Price: 6623 rubles

Another decent quad-core processor with a clock speed of 3.5 GHz. This model is from the same line as the previous one. But in this case we are considering a more perfect apparatus.

It uses a 14 nm technical process, which today is considered a very good indicator. There is also an integrated graphics core, which means that many will be able to assemble a computer without a video card with such a processor. All this has allowed the AMD Ryzen 3 2200G to join the list of powerful and cheap devices.

The Ryzen 3 2200G can be overclocked to a clock speed of 4.1 GHz. With such indicators, the chipset can already handle most games at maximum settings. Unless of course you play in 4K resolution.

The processor has a fairly good built-in video core of 1650 Mhz at 1.3V. So, if you play not the most demanding games, you can do without a video card at all. In short, this is a logical continuation of a successful line.

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

# 5 - AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

Price: 9570 rubles

Now is the time to consider the more expensive AMD Ryzen 5 2400G model. It is necessary to clarify right away that the previous processors cannot be compared with it. There are many reasons for this.

The Ryzen 5 2400G is capable of delivering the highest performance possible from a non-flagship processor.

The main feature of this model is the presence of an advanced integrated video card. It is one of the most powerful types of graphics hardware that makes the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G truly a gaming processor.

This chip is capable of replacing a separate video card, unless, of course, we are talking about top models. The combination of 4 cores with 8 threads and a powerful integrated graphics card is what can provide you with sufficient performance headroom for any task.

And if you also use the program to overclock processors, you can achieve really high results that will leave more expensive models behind.

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

# 4 - AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

Price: 13969 rubles

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X is an improved version of the previous model. Here, in contrast to the first, there are already six cores, at a clock frequency of 3.6 GHz.

The processor is built using a 12nm process technology, which is the most advanced technology for our time. The 2600X has good overclocking capabilities, which attracts many users to this chipset. The considered model can be overclocked to 4 GHz without any problems.

The performance of the Ryzen 5 2600X is more than decent. If you combine this processor with a good video card, you will be able not only to play modern games, but also to work with graphics, the percent is excellent in video rendering.

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

# 3 - AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Price: 21,971 rubles

The AMD Ryzen 5 lineup is good, but let's not dwell on it for a long time and move on to the seven.

The Ryzen 7 2700X is an excellent 8-core processor with a base clock speed of 3.7 GHz and 16MB of cache. In turbo mode, the processor is capable of overclocking up to 4.3 GHz.

Of course, there is also built-in graphics, but hardly anyone would buy such a processor for a computer without a video card. This is a top solution for a home PC, which with this chipset will effortlessly cope with any tasks.

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

# 2 - AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

Price: 58950 rubles

In the previous paragraphs, the most popular processors from AMD were considered, but the table of models of this manufacturer It also contains premium solutions that surpass most of the modern options on the market in terms of their power.

Among them is the 16-core AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which has a clock speed of 3.4 GHz, as well as 32 MB of cache.

The Threadripper 1950X processor can be overclocked to 4 GHz, but it still delivers very high performance at the standard clock speed. At the same time, the chipset is quite cold, its temperature usually does not exceed 60 degrees.

It makes sense to buy a Treadripper to perform professional tasks; in an ordinary gaming PC, its capabilities are excessive.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

# 1 - AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX

Price: 148,710 rubles

Well, the title of the most powerful processor from AMD goes to AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX.

This is the most powerful unit with 32 cores, which is sold at a very high price. For the same money, you can build a fairly powerful personal computer from scratch.

The Threadripper 2990WX is clocked at 3 GHz, but turbo boosts up to 4.2 GHz. As for the cache, there is already 64 MB of it.

The technical process is 12 nm. With such a chipset, you will be able to achieve the best possible performance on your PC.

https://youtu.be/3u6dY2stOBA

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX

So, we have considered the most best offers from AMD. Among them, any gamer or other advanced user can find the perfect processor for themselves.

Fortunately, AMD does not specialize in any particular segment, but produces models for a wide variety of consumers. Probably, thanks to this, they achieved such popularity.