Intel or AMD for your gaming PC? It really is an eternal question that people seem to endlessly debate. Even when we do our reviews of CPUs here at eTeknix it really is difficult to say because we simply don’t have the time to test all the CPUs from both Intel and AMD and figure the answer out. However, over in Asia one review site has gone through some incredibly extensive testing to figure out which one is best. The general jist of the test is that they used a range of games (Crysis, Tomb Raider, Metro etc) and synthetic 3D benchmarks (3DMark, Unigine, etc) and worked out the aggregate performance of each processor. They then created a relative performance figure for each CPU and organised the list by the CPU price. As you can see the results highlighted in red denote “winners” of their price points.
The Core i7 4790K is the best gaming CPU money can buy even though it is cheaper than the Core i7 4930K and Core i7 4960X, this is due to it being Haswell Refresh based which is much more efficient than the Ivy Bridge technology on those Core i7 49XX parts. The Core i3 4360 beats everything AMD has to offer according to these tests so that swoops the mid-range crown. For an entry level system the AMD FX-8300 and FX-6300 pretty much jointly take the crown, easily dispatching of Intel’s similarly priced equivalents. If we go right down to the bottom then it swings back in Intel’s favour, Intel’s dual core Haswell Pentium’s like the G3240 and G1850 wipe the floor of AMD’s low end APU and Athlon parts, AMD’s FX-4000 series CPUs aren’t even in the same price bracket so can’t be counted. I am a little disappointed to see that FM2 Athlon K series CPUs from AMD weren’t included because I think those would have been a lot more competitive at the low end especially with the Pentium G3240.
What are your thoughts on the results of this test? Check more details at the source link.
Source: UDTeam.Tistory, Via: WCCFTech
Image courtesy of downloadsquad.switched.com, Image #2 courtesy of UDTeam
my quad core phenom 2 is a gaming monster still, and at ~$100 it stands untouchable… ive done benchmarks and beat core i3’s core i5’s and fx 6300’s all of which cost way more than $100… and obviously intel stands alone in its price bracket, they are the ONLY cpu’s in that price range… have u price checked cpus? intel range from $300 to $1300 amd range from $70 to $300… thats only a couple cpu’s that can compare on a price scale… granted intel still has the best cpu, but id rather get a bulldog 8 core for $130 than buy a cheap core i3 dual core for $250…
i3 for $250? wtf do you live in africa? I got my Xeon e3 1230 for that price, which is almost literally the exact same chip as the 4770, just without the integrated graphics processor. i3’s run around $130….
So what’s wrong with living in Africa? Have you ever tried it? Don’t believe everything you hear about Africa. I can assure you that no i3 costs anywhere near $230 here in South Africa and the i7 4790K costs about $300-$320 depending.
Surely this is a troll? I’ve rarely seen so much wrong in one comment.
i bet the new Intel Pentium Anniversary edition ($75) beats your CPU in gaming after it is overclocked 🙂 ALSO, there are about a million false facts in your post. for $230, you can get a new i5 4690k. watch this youtube vid.
/watch?v=evXpqpNhu_Y
OK M9 GOOD ONE, the phenom II was one of the last AMD cpu’s worth buying. Apart from that everything else you said is unsubstantiated and inaccurate. Have a nice life.
Lets not also forget the 990 chipset is nearly 4 years old it was wank then and is unsurprisingly still wank.
But I don’t see my 33 MHz 286 chip here, did they forget to test it?
Wonder how would the 9590 and 9370 would stack up in that them fancy chart youz gotz there
I’d say add about 5-7.5% onto the FX 8350 score for the 9590, 3-5% for the 9370
X4 750K and 760K is missing from the list and they dare declare Celeron and Pentium wipe out the low end sector? Meh this is a piece of crap list.
Yes I did point that out 😛 “I am a little disappointed to see that FM2 Athlon K series CPUs from AMD weren’t included because I think those would have been a lot more competitive at the low end especially with the Pentium G3240.”
Strange, ‘extensive’ benchmarking does not seem to exist here. Time consuming sure, extensive, not hardly. It has the same crapshoot of games. While maybe a couple of those games actually utilize 8 cores, it’s mostly showing the same thing we’ve seen over and over. Showing the old generation of dual and quad core games with a couple newer ones. And a strange choice of processors, even when the site lists they were going to use more, a lot were conveniently missing. I am very much so beginning to dislike eteknix. I think it’s time to unlike this worthless site who is usually late to news or comes up with this crap.
They tested 15 games and 2 synthetic benchmarks are you call it a “crapshoot of games”. Dude wtf are you on, it is a GAMING CPU comparison and they test GAMES, oh my god what a crapshoot, yeh good one….
no 4770k?
It would be nice if they tested some previous gen too, such as my 3570k or i5 2500k, as the benefits of those are primarily price..
Yes it would, I can imagine they had a hard time finding those parts though. To be fair I think they already tested a fairly impressive number of CPUs….it would take me like a month to do what they have done.
My thoughts are the test is flawed and incomplete. What are the benchmarks and GPUs used? What about RAM and mother boards or OS? Seriously, this is the first site that has Intel absolutely destroying AMD in regards to gaming benchmarks. Most other ‘complete’ reviews have AMD about 1% behind Intel in regards to gaming. EPIC Fail eTeknix.
All the details of the test system can be found at the source link if you had checked. You thoughts that the testing are flawed and incomplete is an opinion, thank you for sharing it, but an opinion is not evidence, please present evidence that the test is flawed and incomplete, I would be interested to see how.