What are the pros and cons of the Amd Processors

I am choosing a processor for a new pc that I intend to assemble for the current requirements and the amd processors called my atention for their quality and price, but I see that many choose Intel porcessors, I want to know the reason and what are the pros and cons of that Brand of processors.

I had a Sapphire Radeon 7970 and then switched to an Nvidia 1060 6GB. I can honestly say Nvidia is better because one, the prices were cheaper for some reason and the specs were higher (Sapphire was about $350 and 1060 was $300). The updates and software for AMD were also pretty crappy; it would easily crash and have errors when trying to upgrade. I tried searching online for help, but apparently that's what AMD's software is all about, and all we gotta do is wait for them to fix it with updates. With Nvidia I never had that problem, and I never had problems with gaming either since all the software were constantly upgraded.

In the past, AMD processors were very famous for overheating. Today I believe it has evolved a lot and are very close to the Intel processors.
The cost of an AMD processor is also relatively cheaper and this is a big advantage.

I can confirm about the overheating deal. Both CPUs and GPUs, except for the newest models, apparently, reach very high temperatures. I don't know if this still stands true, but I once heard that AMD relies more on the number of cores and how they interact with each other, whereas Intel CPUs have better cores.
Intel CPUs seem to be more reliable in the long run. AMD ones are cheaper and almost as powerful, but software updates and high temperatures will wear them out in a shorter time. If you can afford it, go with Intel (again, the new AMD models seem to have worked on these issues, but their price is now comparable to Intel's).

PenguinManiac said:

I can confirm about the overheating deal. Both CPUs and GPUs, except for the newest models, apparently, reach very high temperatures. I don't know if this still stands true, but I once heard that AMD relies more on the number of cores and how they interact with each other, whereas Intel CPUs have better cores.
Intel CPUs seem to be more reliable in the long run. AMD ones are cheaper and almost as powerful, but software updates and high temperatures will wear them out in a shorter time. If you can afford it, go with Intel (again, the new AMD models seem to have worked on these issues, but their price is now comparable to Intel's).

Click to expand...

Ohh, sometimes I heard about the overheating, I thought that just to solve the problem its necesary only give good ventilation but I see that is a problem more or less serious, I think I'd better go for Intel to save me those problems.

OursIsTheFury said:

I had a Sapphire Radeon 7970 and then switched to an Nvidia 1060 6GB. I can honestly say Nvidia is better because one, the prices were cheaper for some reason and the specs were higher (Sapphire was about $350 and 1060 was $300). The updates and software for AMD were also pretty crappy; it would easily crash and have errors when trying to upgrade. I tried searching online for help, but apparently that's what AMD's software is all about, and all we gotta do is wait for them to fix it with updates. With Nvidia I never had that problem, and I never had problems with gaming either since all the software were constantly upgraded.

Click to expand...

Yes i heard about that, at the level of gpu Nvidia gives better support in their drivers than Amd which is a serious problem when new games is about.

Deathisue said:

Ohh, sometimes I heard about the overheating, I thought that just to solve the problem its necesary only give good ventilation but I see that is a problem more or less serious, I think I'd better go for Intel to save me those problems.

Yes i heard about that, at the level of gpu Nvidia gives better support in their drivers than Amd which is a serious problem when new games is about.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I only had the 7970 for a short while, but it wasn't as advertised. Like I didn't get my money's worth for the price I paid. 1060 was cheaper and a lot better performance-wise, so if I ever upgrade again, I'll definitely stick to Nvidia stuff. Radeon cards may have a higher limit, but the software updates alone (and not having to crash when you want to use it) is enough for me to just buy Nvidia cards for the rest of my life.

Yep, I agree with the boys. AMD is generally lower cost but more heat output which results in overheating. Usually, the NVIDIA CPUs are more expensive but also perform much smoother and better. I rarely hear complaints about the Intel CPUs.

So, unless you truly can't afford the Nvidia's, then buy the AMD. Otherwise, it's probably Intel > AMD processors.

Am currently using a PC that runs on AMD processor. AMD offers less variety of CPUs when compared to intel. But offers lower priced CPUs in the market.
Apart from cost, AMD from my experience consumes high wattage which directly affects its battery life. AMD processors easily gets hot. This may be unconnected with the high wattage it consumes.
AMD mother boards are non detachable unlike intel's this makes it impossible for replacement.

Back in the days of AMD Athlon II, AMD was the king of the processor world. They had much faster processors then Intel and everyone wanted a AMD processor. But these days AMD is being left in the dust by Intel. The AMD Rysen is a great processor and it can keep up with or beat most I7's and then Intel had to drop a bomb on AMD and release the I9's. And now Intel is blowing AMD out of the water again. However if price is a concern when building a new computer I would go with AMD. Unless you're building a gaming PC and then I would just save up for a Intel processor.

Pros: AMD processors are very affordable. If you are on a tight budget, AMD could be for you.

Cons: If you are very nitpicky on your Frames per second rate, you would have a hard time with an AMD processor.

On applications(demanding stuff like multitasking, and render stuff)

Pros of AMD: The FX 8320/50 CPU is excellent for multitasking, the performance, for example, on rendering a video, a FX-8320/50 gets all cores usually fully utilized, which makes it a very strong contender against an Intel i5. So for these type of things, AMD is really strong and doesn't cost nearly as much.

Cons of AMD: You usually wouldn't have IPC problems with light applications, unless it's something that should run on 1-2 cores. If you have an application that should run on two cores, just get yourself an i5.

A lot of things have probably changed now with their processors so I can't comment about that.

have own different processors and i can the the AMD was least impressive. It was always constantly overheating and slowed down task i did on my system. I would prefer any other high powered processor but certainly not an AMD.

AMD is great when you're on a budget, but it did have some issues in the past models about overheating a lot. This kept me away from AMD for a long time and switched to Nvidia. Nvidia is actually really good, the updates are amazing. My MGSV went from 15fps to 40 fps after several updates, it's fun playing a game with such amazing graphics on a midrange laptop.