AMD or Intel - Which platform should I go for?

[absic]

As anyone who frequents this forum on a regular basis will know, I have been using AMD systems for well over ten years and have always been really pleased with the way things work. But recently, I have come across a few situations where I have encountered issues and, on approaching different hardware manufacturer's, have been told: "Sorry, we don't have an AMD system for testing". I have to say that I have found this response more than a little surprising. Alright, I know that Intel dominates the home PC market but, there are enough AMD user's to surely warrant a better approach than this.

Things came to a head recently when I purchased a couple of SSD's and was bitterly dissappointed at the write speeds that I was able to get from them which were way below those claimed in the advertising literature. I have now spent two months, trying to get an answer as to why this is happening and, once again, I was told that they didn't have an AMD system for testing. Since I got in touch with them they have now got a Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5 for testing, but I still haven't had any real answers as to the situation.

Then AMD's Bulldozer FX processors came along and the reviews were less than flattering so, along with a raft of other AMD users, I have had to think what my next steps will be, regarding upgrading my current system or switching platforms. Trying to make this choice is not easy, as the cost of switching motherboards and CPU does not come cheap but the cost of upgrading to a Bulldozer FX for the reported little gains over my current X6 1090T makes this even more of a challenge and is a similar situation that you may well be facing.

Now, I have to admit that I am in a luckier position than most, as I was presented with the chance of getting an Intel i5 2500k CPU without actually spending any money, from a local PC company that I helped out. So, I decided that this  opportunity was too good a chance to pass up and I grabbed it with both hands. Gigabyte have generously provided a motherboard, the GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 so I am now in a position to offer some real, honest and practicle advice and comparaisons between AMD and Intel based systems.

For my testing I have tried to build the two systems with as much closeness of the hardware as possible and listed here are the two system specifications:

AMD
Motherboard: GA-990FXA-UD5
Motherboard BIOS: F6
Processor: Phenom ii X6 1090T
RAM: Corsair Vengeance Black LP CML16GX3M4A1600C9 2x4GB Modules
Graphic Card: Gigabyte ATI 6770 (GV-R677UD-1GD)
SSD: ADATA S511 60GB
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB SATA3
Monitor: LG L194WT
Mouse: Microsoft Intellimouse Optical USB
Keyboard: Microsoft Digital Media Pro

Intel
Motherboard: GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3
Motherboard BIOS: F7
Processor:i5 2500k
RAM: Corsair Vengeance Black LP CML16GX3M4A1600C9 2x4GB Modules
Graphic Card: Gigabyte ATI 6770 (GV-R677UD-1GD)
SSD: ADATA S511 60GB
HDD: Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB SATA3
Monitor: LG L194WT
Mouse: Microsoft Intellimouse Optical USB
Keyboard: Microsoft Digital Media Pro

Both systems are running Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit (Retail)

Then only real difference with the two systems are the PSU's that I am using. The AMD System is powered by a 620 Watt Corsair Modular unit and the Intel is being powered by a Gigabyte Odin 800 Watt Modular unit.

I am not planning to go through overclocking on either system and both will be tested at default settings. The only exception to this will be the RAM which I will be running at its rated speed of 1600MHz on both boards.

This article is not so much about benchmarking figures, although I will be providing some, but more about how I, a long time AMD user, find the switch to building an Intel system and if I can actually see or feel any real difference in the day-to-day use that I put my system through. Generally I use my PC for Music production using Cubase and Video and photo editing using Adobe Creative Suite 5. I also use my PC for web browsing and general programmes such as Microsoft Office, DVD/CD burning, e-mail and the such like.

When I first planned this item, the Phenom ii Processors were still readily available but as some of you may have read AMD is dropping these and they are becoming harder to find. So sadly this article is not about a direct comparison with a Bulldozer processor but hopefully in the future I will be able to update things when I finally get hold of one.

So, let's look at the first argument that comes up whenever you think about putting a system together, cost. It used to be the case that there was a vast difference between an AMD system and an Intel one. Is that still the case?
Well, I have to say that I was actually surprised when I did the maths on this one and the cost for putting together a basic system of CPU, RAM, Motherboard, Graphic Card, PSU and a single SSD actually worked out as follows:



If you swapped the cost of the Phenomii CPU that I already have for the FX8120 Processor then the AMD system would actually cost £626 so it would be slightly more expensive. This is really not what I had expected. The cost for a different Intel motherboard would have bought the two closer together but the reality is, that at the present time, there is really nothing to choose between the cost of the two platforms when it comes to putting a mid to high end new system together.

I have added a couple of extra HDD's to both systems along with the monitors, keyboards, mice and the Operating System but I already own these so were not included in the costs. Obviously, these would have to be taken into account if you are putting a new system together rather than upgrading or switching platforms.

Putting the two systems together was relatively painless although, as I haven't put an Intel system together for a long time, I did have to double check what I was doing at each stage. The only real difference I encountered with the hardware was with the CPU and how it is mounted and extra care needs to be taken on the Intel platform so as to avoid damage to the pins in the CPU socket, but again, this could have been due to my lack of experience.

Once I had the two systems built I obviously needed to install the OS, in this case Windows7 Ultimate. I always use the USB installation method for doing this and have found it a very quick and painless method. I timed the installation process of both systems so that I could compare how long they took. To do this I decided that it would be best to get to the stage in the installation process where things actually are being installed to the drive. So, my timings started after I had set up the drive partition and ended when I was first able to use the PC to install the motherboard drivers.

Using my trusty electronic timer I hit the next button in the Windows installer and allowed the installation to go ahead without further input from myself. The results were a little surprising as I hadn't expected any real difference at this stage but I was wrong.
Installing Windows7 took:-
AMD Platform - 8 minutes 32 seconds
Intel Platform - 6 minutes 14 seconds
So it was well over 2 minutes faster on the Intel PC than on AMD.

Once I had installed the OS and the motherboard drivers I thought I would run the Windows Experience Index (WEI). Personally I don't hold much store in this but I did think it would be interesting to see what figures were returned, especially as the GPU, RAM, and SSD in both system were identical. The results were as follows:

AMD


Intel


As you can see the WEI is the same for the CPU's and the GPU's but different when it comes to Memory operations and Primary Hard Disk.

The difference between platforms is even more noticeable when I ran ATTO to benchmark the SSD's

AMD


Intel


So, what do I make of this so far?
Well, having been running AMD systems for at least 10 years, I am obviously comfortable with the platform and believe I know how to get the best from the system. This is not the case with the Intel platform and I think it will take me a little while to understand exactly where the differences lie.

When it came to putting together the two systems, there really wasn't anything to choose between them. Yes, I did struggle a bit more with the Intel set-up but this was due to lack of experience rather than any real difficulty and if you are building your first system then they are very similar and would be an equal challenge.

Loathe as I am to say this, I have to admit that my initial reaction is that the Intel system does seem to be faster and more responsive and everything seems to work as I would expect. I'm not sure if this is a reality and further testing and hands-on experience should, I hope, prove if this is actually the case.

to be continued.....

[absic]

I have now run some file transfer tests on both systems.
The charts below should be self explanatory and to arrive at the final figures I ran each test five times then took the average.







I should point out that both motherboards use the same Etron EJ168 USB3 controller.

I was very surprised by the transfer speeds when it came to the internal HDD's and that the difference was so great between the two systems. I actually re-ran the transfer tests just to make sure I hadn't made a mistake. It is worth restating the fact that the Internal HDD's are the same models in both PC's and I can only put the difference down to the actual SATA controllers and their implementation.

I have never felt that my AMD PC was slow and have always been more than satisfied at the speed things were completed in but now...... well, these figures speak for themselves!

to be continued....

[teknology9]

Hi absic,

This looks very interesting, its a pity you can't get hold of a FX CPU to use on your FX MB only for testing purposes if anything. Also, what are the chances of putting a Nvidia GPU on the Intel platform....preferably with at least 90 + Cuda cores.



Teknology9

[absic]

I'm in no rush to get an FX processor but if someone wants to lend me one for testing (hint, hint) I will be more than happy to do so.

With regard to testing an NVidia Card on the Intel Platform I can manage this as I have a Gigabyte GT430 (GV-N430OC-1GL) although I'm not sure how fair a test this actually is, when up against the ATI6770 GPU. When testing the difference between the recoding properties of both GPU's on my AMD system using Nero 11 recode, which actually can take advantage of the processing power of either an NVidia Card or an ATI one I got the following figures:

Recoding a .mkv Video file to DivX
Original File Size: 3.22GB
Video Length: 1Hr 40mins 17 Secs.
Nvidia GT430 - 41':10"
ATI 6770 - 40':00"

So there wasn't much to choose between them.

[teknology9]

Perhaps a Gigabyte 560 Ti or a GPU on a par with the Ati 6770........and I'm sure those good people at Gigabyte UK could loan you a FX CPU just for the duration of this article....maybe? 

[Dark Mantis]

Interesting review so far absic, I will look forward to the next instalment. I am surprised that there was such a big difference between the two systems on some of those tests.

Watch out mate you are coming over to the Dark Side!

[Aussie Allan]

  " Loathe as I am to say this, I have to admit that my initial reaction is that the Intel system does seem to be faster and more responsive"


     If I an Intel man said this it would mean nothing ..... But coming from Absic the AMD Guru  

   "Dishwashers"  Luv em or Hate em ..... they just do the dishes faster then by hand   Welcome to Intel Absic... Coo, Coo, Coo!

  Aussie Allan

[absic]

Watch out mate you are coming over to the Dark Side!

From what I have experienced so far I have to say that you are right. My biggest complaint, the one of cost, is just not true and this was a real eye opener. Yes, I could put a more expensive Intel system together, but the reality is, for the things that the vast majority of user's want their PC's to do you don't need to and the Intel rig I have put together is so much faster in some areas that I have had to double check my figures. And this is with the motherboard at basically default settings.

I am really surprised at the way the two systems handle transfers of large files and when putting the two systems together I wondered if the lack of native SATA3 ports on the Intel system would have an impact. It did, but not in the way I expected. It is so much faster at transferring files between internal HDD's that the lack of SATA3 ports is really not an issue.

When I ran the tests for extracting and compressing RAR files the difference in time taken was another surprise (I seem to be using this word a lot but I can't think how else to describe things) with extracting files on the Intel system taking seconds compared to over a minute on the AMD PC. I do a lot of extracting and transferring files and these two activities would take me about an hour less on the Intel PC which I really didn't expect.

Like a lot of Home PC builders I have read reviews and comparison charts for the difference between AMD and Intel PC's but these do not replace hands-on experience, as Aussie Allan says:   "Dishwashers"  Luv em or Hate em ..... they just do the dishes faster then by hand" I would say the difference I am experiencing is that of using candles to light the home over electric lights!

If there is something that members would like me to compare on the two systems, then please post your requests and I will, if possible, cover it for you.

[teknology9]

Yes cost is always an important factor, my dilema is whether to do this:

Z68 MB + Highpoint 640

or

X79 UD3 / UD5 with a 3820 CPU

Teknology9

[Dark Mantis]

Hi teknology,

I guess the answer really depends on what you intend to do with it in the long run. The X79 based system will always be more powerful than the Z68 but there again the power of the X79 will not be of any use to a lot of people because they won't be running the right type of applications for it to make the most of the extra power.

It will also remain the more expensive option from the word go.

[teknology9]

Hi DM

The main reason is due to the port speeds, both you and AA have Revo drives and AA has a Highpoint 640 as it would seem that you have spent more to get the desired speeds. So factoring in the cost of a Highpoint it would be around £225......a X79 UD3 is about £170. But I understand what you are saying.......but the card could be purchased at a later date.


Teknology9

[Dark Mantis]

Yes what you are saying does make sense and as you remarked you could add it at a later date.  The Revo drives have got much cheaper now too so that could be another option maybe. I was more referring to the fact that everything is more expensive for the X79 boards though. The motherboards are pricey compared to the Z68s and especially the CPUs too. Then you have quad channel memory so that is extra and as I say unless you are running programs that require heavy multitasking and multithreading along with plenty of brute force you would be just as well off with a Z68 and a 2600K. Much cheaper and still fast.

[teknology9]

Yes, I'll think I'll wait until I can get this MB with Gen 3:

http://uk.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3979#ov


Teknology9

[absic]

OK, I've now been running the Intel system for a month and have begun to get to grips with some of the finer points of the BIOS  and have had some interesting discoveries about what I can achieve with this board and processor.

I have experimented with running a RAID0 Array on the Intel controller via SATA3 and it worked fine, however, as I really have no need to run a RAID Array I decided to revert to running in AHCI Mode with all the drives I use. Setting the RAID Array up was pretty straight forward but I didn't use the XHD option in BIOS, preferring to manually configure the settings for the array myself.

Over the past couple of days I have started seriously playing with the overclocking capabilities of the CPU and having done a lot of research felt comfortable to start tweaking. I have to say at this point that I did a little experimenting earlier in this journey but didn't have much success due to overclock warnings in BIOS that automatically shut the PC Down and rebooted it. Sometimes, this occurred even if I had the optimised defaults loaded and hadn't actually O/C'd anything. This issue seems to have been partially resolved with the latest BIOS for the motherboard (F8C) but I do have concerns that things are not as good as they could, or indeed should be here. It will be interesting to see if future BIOS updates cure some of the niggles that I have been experiencing or, if in fact they are just down to user error!

Anyway, I am not a serious overclocker but I do like to see how far I can go with such things and I have managed to reach a stable 4.6GHz with the CPU and a maximum temperature of 57C.



Not a world record but it is 1.3 GHz over stock and well within the temperature threshold for the CPU so I am quite pleased. I also believe that I can go faster than this and still keep things within safe limits but that is for the future. For now, I will leave things as they are.

So, what are my views having now had some time to compare my AMD and Intel systems? As much as I hate to say this, there really is no comparison. AMD have served me very well over the years but my AMD rig has been consigned to my mother's house, where it can have a good home and I can use it for testing and troubleshooting. For everyday use and a much more pleasant computing experience I have now switched to the Intel system.

Yes, there are still things that could be improved but hey, we are talking of computers here. For the things I want to do with my PC the Intel based system knocks spots off of the AMD rig in almost every area. One of the biggest complaints that I had was the perceived higher cost of putting together an Intel system. Yes, you can spend much more for a really high-end Intel PC but for most users there really is no need to do this and as I have shown, you can actually put together a better Intel system for a lower price than you can build a comparable AMD rig for.

I started this thread with the question I have been asked a lot: " AMD or Intel - Which platform should I go for?"

Personally, I would now say Intel.......



but of course, the final choice is yours!
 

[teknology9]

This makes for good reading absic, are those new drivers from Intel out yet regarding TRIM for RAID0 and have you tried them?