AMD or Intel?

[LeeW]

The NZXT H1 is about the same size as a Sonnet eGFX Breakaway Box or similar eGPU enclosure but it is well designed as a compact PC case.

I decided against the NZXT H1 for two reasons, it's just not available anywhere and it's just too limited for airflow. I will probably want to add more in time so better with something bigger.

Still, really want a right-side window case, so hard to find a decent one with reasonable space without being massive.

 

[LiE_]

Forgo the window and get the Cooler Master NR200 and run mesh panels.

 

[LeeW]

Forgo the window and get the Cooler Master NR200 and run mesh panels.

I have seen that one, really wanted to show it off and do some nice cooling work. Well, that was the plan, I am not fixed on it. Would just have looked nice on the left side of my desk.

 

[LeeW]

Also really like the look of this one, it has enough space if I use large SSD drives in place of the Sata ones I have for backups.

Phanteks Innovative Computer Hardware Design

www.phanteks.com

 

[LiE_]

That has no window, the mesh may allow a bit of RGB to come through but no more than the mesh on the NR200.

 

[LeeW]

That has no window, the mesh may allow a bit of RGB to come through

True but the form factor is ideal for the space I have. Will keep looking about and see what takes my fancy

 

[LeeW]

Decided to stick with my current case, it was only going to be a complete rebuild if I found something that would work with my current desk layout.

So have ordered a new motherboard, an Intel i7-10700k, AIO cooler, 32GB Ram and a couple of new NVMe drives. Will keep me going for many years to come.

 

[Ethosik]

I was looking at getting an AMD processor. But apparently they do not have h.264/h.265 hardware encode/decode on the CPU level? So this is why I decided to go with the Intel CPUs. Also I believe the benchmarks are still in favor of Intel for gaming, AMD for everything else. I plan to game and use Visual Studio/Adobe/Affinity and other software, so Intel is a nice balance of both.

 

[Ethosik]

Since when? I remember even earlier copies of Windows 10 (when it launched) working fully for 30 days and then going into limited access mode, no internet, no access to many things games need to run. no access to low-level drivers. Pro would also shut down after 45 minutes of being on. Good luck playing a great multi-player game and being shut down arbitrarily!

The only thing really that I have noticed if you do not activate windows is some personalization things - like changing desktop wallpaper or colors. I might be missing some things, but I do not think it is critical these days.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

I was looking at getting an AMD processor. But apparently they do not have h.264/h.265 hardware encode/decode on the CPU level? So this is why I decided to go with the Intel CPUs. Also I believe the benchmarks are still in favor of Intel for gaming, AMD for everything else. I plan to game and use Visual Studio/Adobe/Affinity and other software, so Intel is a nice balance of both.

Just a quick note, some applications offer GPU hardware support for media encoding. While I don't use Adobe software, I do know that Davinci Resolve and Shotcut recognize AMD and Nvidia GPUs and will leverage the graphics hardware.

Similarly Handbrake has AMD and Nvidia VCE options for encoding. Intel QSV will also show up in Handbrake if you have an Intel CPU.

 

[Ethosik]

Just a quick note, some applications offer GPU hardware support for media encoding. While I don't use Adobe software, I do know that Davinci Resolve and Shotcut recognize AMD and Nvidia GPUs and will leverage the graphics hardware.

Similarly Handbrake has AMD and Nvidia VCE options for encoding. Intel QSV will also show up in Handbrake if you have an Intel CPU.

CPU hardware video encoding/decoding is better - unless GPUs have improved in this area. OBS settings seem fine at around 5,000 Kbps with x264/x265. Using the GPU, I need to set it to 30,000 or even higher if I play fast paced games.

 

[LeeW]

AMD is fine but with all their issues Intel still has the edge, only just by the looks of it but you can't really go wrong with either I believe. But from what I have read Ryzen CPUs cause a bottleneck with Nvidia cards, not a massive loss in performance, certainly, nothing I would see but I am used to Intel builds so best to stick with what you know I guess, true in my case at least

 

[Ethosik]

AMD is fine but with all their issues Intel still has the edge, only just by the looks of it but you can't really go wrong with either I believe. But from what I have read Ryzen CPUs cause a bottleneck with Nvidia cards, not a massive loss in performance, certainly, nothing I would see but I am used to Intel builds so best to stick with what you know I guess, true in my case at least

For someone that will not be touching water cooling no matter what, will the Noctua NH-D15 be good for either Intel or AMD?

 

[LeeW]

For someone that will not be touching water cooling no matter what, will the Noctua NH-D15 be good for either Intel or AMD?

Yes, I put that in my son's machine, he has an i7-7700k and it idles in the low 30s, maxes out in the mid 60s. Although it can be a bit noisy, the Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 is a much quieter but equally as good option.

 

[Ethosik]

Yes, I put that in my son's machine, he has an i7-7700k and it idles in the low 30s, maxes out in the mid 60s. Although it can be a bit noisy, the Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 is a much quieter but equally as good option.

I believe Linus used it with Threadripper too.

 

[LeeW]

I decided to change at the last minute and go for the BeQuiet Dark Pro 4 rather than an AIO. Everything arrived today, got to love Amazon for being able to do sudden changes and still get everything delivered to the same time.

Anyway, took a couple of hours but all upgraded and running really nice, I wanted the extra CPU power of the i7-10700 and 32gb ram purely for Virtual Machines. But I do a bit of gaming, WoW that kind of thing, nothing too complex.

The difference is evident right away in terms of VM performance but I am really impressed with the temps. Before I shut down to do the upgrades I did a couple of tests.

Idle - 38-42C
Playing WoW - 63-74C

Post upgrade they came down significantly.

Idle - 30-33C
Playing WoW - 37-46C

Did a couple of benchmarks and the highest temp was 56C. Now, I used good thermal paste and appreciate that my old setup was old and the cooler was not as good.

At Idle the Cooler fans are running at 235rpm which is crazy, I have another 3 fans running in the case but as I am typing this it is eerily quiet, whereas before I could hear fans blaring.

So yeah, very pleased with a relatively cheap upgrade vs a new machine, although I will say, OMFG, the size of the Dark Pro 4, how that thing manages to hang off the motherboard is nuts.

 

[iamdadid]

Always go for AMD, that would be the smartest choice.

 

[LeeW]

Always go for AMD, that would be the smartest choice.

The smart way to post is to provide an explanation rather than a sweeping statement.

 

[nickdalzell1]

AMD has always performed better for less cost over Intel. I especially got a sour experience with Intel's horrid HD Graphics crap. Forget that if you're gaming.

Intel always = lower FPS rates for myself. Never even dream of gaming with anything less than an i7 if you're really determined to go Intel.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

Today's games are almost exclusively GPU bound. CPU performance is secondary to GPU performance in regard to FPS stats during gaming. Hell, I might say CPU performance is tertiary. Monitor performance is likely second. Today there are fast response 4K gaming monitors running far beyond 60Hz.

A sh!tty monitor is more of a hindrance to a quality gaming experience than a mid-range CPU.

A current generation 6-core/12-thread 65W TDP CPU from either Intel or AMD is sufficient for Ultra 1440p gaming at high framerates. Even for 4K gaming, the GPU selection is far more important than the CPU choice.

If you want to overclock a component for better gaming performance, do the GPU first. Most likely, GPU core voltage adjustments will result in the most overall improvements. It is no surprise why PC gaming sites focus on GPU overclocking instead of CPU overclocking.

Note that proper GPU choice will result in qualitative improvements of gaming experience. A faster CPU might just end up with a bigger electricity bill and no actual benefit.

Exhibit A: Control from Remedy. The game is gorgeous with Nvidia raytracing and DLSS turned on. This double feature is frequently advertised as RTX ON. Raytracing is a costly performance hit and DLSS is the secret sauce that brings performance back to normal levels. DLSS also has its own image quality enhancements.

Current CPUs have zero capability of performing these visual optimizations in today's videogames. These are GPU driven enhancements. Throwing in an AMD Threadripper isn't going to get there.

A Radeon RX 5700 XT will run around the same framerate as a GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER for $100 less. However, the Radeon driven display won't have raytracing.

Some might say "Well, raytracing is only supported on a handful of games." Raytracing is coming to the next-gen Xbox and PS consoles. It's also on two of the most popular games: Minecraft and Fortnite (the latter starting tomorrow).

I play a few ancient games on my plain Jane Windows PC ultrathin notebook where even the Intel integrated graphics are sufficient for 150+ fps play at 1080p. They're still GPU limited.

Moreover, today's games, GPUs, and game APIs have changed from five years ago. Dual GPUs? Quickly losing relevance today. Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 dumped the SLI connector for good reason.

All of this I can see this with my eyes running the MSI Afterburner overlay. My GPU is maxxed out at 100% and my CPU is taking a lackadaisical walk in the park around 40-50% utilization.

Summary: ignore advice based on what worked 10-15 years ago in the PC gaming industry. It's not 2005.

 

[2984839]

I've always been a huge fan of AMD. Just got a T14 Thinkpad with a 4750U and it is light years better than my T480 (yeah I know it's newer, but not by that much). AMD also has been less vulnerable to speculative execution attacks than Intel has, so there's a security benefit as well. I am willing to run this laptop with SMT enabled, but I wouldn't with Intel.

 

[nickdalzell1]

Ever since I built my first gaming rig back in the AMD K6/2 days, AMD has been the de-facto gamer's choice.

I've tried Intel and the performance has always been hideous, especially if you're using their garbage integrated graphics. I'm not spending tons more for a GeForce just to make up for Intel's lackluster speeds. Most games I play some make use of the GPU more and many others (Such as Portal 2, Farm Expert 2017, to name a couple) depend more on higher CPU over the GPU and overclocking the GPU does nothing except make the fans run loudly.

Even an i5 can barely make an ancient game such as Deer Avenger 3D (from 2002?) playable. The monitor makes no difference if the system is weak.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

You can buy Intel processors without integrated graphics today.

Hell, twenty-or-so years ago, that's the only type of Intel processor one could buy. I was rockin' a 400 MHz Pentium II back in 1997! No crummy Intel iGPU back then! And no integrated audio either. Creative SoundBlaster AWE or PCI64, baby! And no integrated Ethernet either. Most people didn't have the Internet back then so they didn't know about websites like Tom's Hardware or AnandTech.

And the cool new stylish aluminum case from Lian-Li! So much better than beige-painted stamped steel from InWin!

AsusTek motherboards had no discotheque RGB effects. No silent Noctua fans. PC Power & Cooling was the bees' knees for PSUs. S3 or ATI graphics, Nvidia was in the first year as a startup.

And thank God that I don't need to shell out three figures on an Adaptec SCSI card for my IBM and Quantum hard drives. And I waved goodbye to my pile of active and passive terminators as well. Good riddance!

However I sure do miss my Iomega Zip 100 drive, especially the SCSI version which worked with some SGI systems.

I can play eighteen year old games like The Operative: No One Lives Forever on my crap Acer notebook with its Intel Integrated Graphics 920 at 240 fps. The game actually tells me increase the quality levels even though they're all maxxed out! And don't get me started on the legacy Tomb Raider Anniversary Edition!

Are you sure you're in 2020? Check the date on your fax machine and VCR!

 

[nickdalzell1]

While I do have VCRs still (super cheap to find movies that never got released on DVD/Blu-ray for less than 50 cents at a thrift store) I haven't used a fax in ages. I am surprised that some folks today still rely on dot-matrix printers.

My MBP says it's from 2019 but 2020 is a year I'd love to forget! However, from my personal experience, I am always going to favor AMD Ryzen over garbage Intel. Intel does well for things like office software and browsing but they've never been a gamer's choice. I've tried many times and they're cheaper sometimes, but you get what you pay for. lackluster FPS on higher settings, having to buy twice as pricey GPU to make up for the lousy CPU, dealing with more heat issues, not having access to unlocked overclocking (all Ryzens are unlocked from the factory), Integrated graphics nightmares on laptops, etc.

The most recent attempt at gaming on an Intel was my Acer Ultrabook from like 2013. It had an Intel i5 quad-core, 500GB HDD, 4 GB RAM, and of course, Intel HD Graphics. Farming Sim '17 had to have the best stuff like anti-aliasing and higher resolutions turned off to be playable (at a horrid 15 FPS) and it was a pixelated mess. I despise jaggies, cannot play without AA on.

Portal 2 couldn't play well either, it lagged or felt like a slideshow, as did Euro Truck Simulator, or even Farming Simulator 2013. I tried Deer Avenger 4 (newer than 3D) and it crashed out the gate complaining about no shaders capability. This was a Windows 8 machine. It's now running Linux and acting as a Plex server and NAS, which it's at least capable of. If an i5 can't make up for the lousy GPU, I can't imagine an i3, which I've seen folks build gaming rigs with. That's gotta suck. NVidea GPUs must be running seriously into like 90 celcius just trying to make up for that lousy CPU.

My current setup is a Ryzen 3 and I've underclocked the CPU to 1.5GHz, the GPU is running at 1.2GHZ core clock with the memory clock at 2048 MHz (AMD Radeon 7500 GPU with dual fans) which is 1/2 what it was on default settings, which still nets me 60 FPS on Farming Simulator 19, Pure Farming 2018, Euro Truck Simulator 2 (all updates), and Fallout 4 with a ton of mods installed. AMD out-performs Intel 9 to 1. You'd have to max overclock everything on Intel and probably live with tons of fan noise (unless you want to spend far more on special fans that are quieter) just to get similar performance from even an i7, plus every pre-built I've seen with Intel is twice the price of the AMD.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

Summary: you are comparing a recent AMD Ryzen-powered computer with a 7-year-old Intel notebook (with a spinning hard drive) on non-AAA gaming titles, none of which push the GPU.

Worse, you don't even mention what resolution you are comparing these at? 480p? 800p? And what display capability?

That really is comparing apples with oranges.

I see that you have totally ignored my comments that CPU overclocking have little to do with today's 3D gaming performance. Again, all of the major PC sites (gaming focused or not) really don't focus on CPUs which you are obsessed with. You have also repeatedly denied the existence of Intel desktop CPUs that don't have integrated graphics.

Guess what? Apple still uses these.

Today's PC videogames are GPU bound.

Circling back to my initial reply, this is the inanity of the AMD v. Intel discussion. It focuses on the wrong thing (at least when discussing 3D gaming). This is as asinine as the Canon v. Nikon jihad for photography.

The discussion lies elsewhere. For gaming, it's Radeon v. GeForce. Intel integrated graphics has never been a contender in the 3D graphics world. Someday hopefully Intel will, but what they will do is eat into Radeon's marketshare before they can get anywhere near GeForce.