Threads like will likely be neverending stories.
Both are very capable processors, but there is no answer to your question:
To get a better view of your expectations, you have to tell the forum exactly what you are going to do with your PC.
Programs, games, what other parts will be installed, budget, lifetime, etc etc etc. We want to know EVERYTHING.
Will you be editing and rendering video, are you running a server? Or just using Firefox and MS Word?
Because to start of with, 4 Ghz AMD does not equal 4 Ghz Intel.
And the Intel has Turbo Boost, which can make it run @ 3,7 Ghz but on lesser cores.
But if you have a crappy motherboard or a slow harddisc, you'll never put them to use anyway.
Regards HB.
I want to use it for gaming, don't worry about the mother board , just tell me which one is better for gaming.
I just want to say this about the FX and why they truly fail.
Say you have a FX 4, it is really a dual core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "4 core".
Say you have a FX 6, it is really a tripple core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "6 core".
Say you have a FX 8, it is really a quad core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "8 core".
As you see, splitting resources isnt the best idea.
The i5 processors, quad core, with true 4 cores. Each core has 256KB L2 cache, but 6MB L3 cache to share so in theory you could even have 1 core using 5MB L3 which acts like its L2 cache, insanity at finest.
Hyperthreading is just a name given to a process that makes 1 core act like 2 (or more?). I'm pretty sure Windows (and maybe other operating systems) can't tell the difference between two different threads using the same core and 2 threads on different cores.
It has 6 cores but only 3,3 GHz
And theres this also good processor which has 4 cores but it's 4,00 GHz strong.
So, is it better to have 6 cores and 3,3 GHz or 4 cores and 4,00 Ghz???
Help >
The best CPUs at the moment for your money are Intel's sandybridge line.
Other one with 6 cores is AMD-FX6100
that alone is enough to get the intel, the FX processors are beaten by intels Pentium processors, get the 2500k as it will destroy any FX processor
i5-4690K @4.6GHz ~ ASRock Z97X Fatal1ty Killer ~ EKWB Supremacy MX ~ Watercooled SLI STRIX 970s
Project RedShift
I want to use it for gaming, don't worry about the mother board , just tell me which one is better for gaming.
Say you have a FX 4, it is really a dual core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "4 core".
Say you have a FX 6, it is really a tripple core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "6 core".
Say you have a FX 8, it is really a quad core with the cores AND core resources split in half, making it "8 core".
As you see, splitting resources isnt the best idea.
The i5 processors, quad core, with true 4 cores. Each core has 256KB L2 cache, but 6MB L3 cache to share so in theory you could even have 1 core using 5MB L3 which acts like its L2 cache, insanity at finest.
Real cores, is better then fake cores.
Most games don't use multiple cores, and the few that do don't use them a lot of very effectively.
No, he is right to say. Most games if any barely use no more then dual core as of date, some others may use more on more up to date engines.
No game to my knowledge uses Hyper Threading, or games that really are known.
Hyperthreading is just a name given to a process that makes 1 core act like 2 (or more?). I'm pretty sure Windows (and maybe other operating systems) can't tell the difference between two different threads using the same core and 2 threads on different cores.