either your young or dont know what you are talking about
sure amd has not been on top since the pentium 4 days
but they have well and truly taken their crown back
LOL - But you are not biased, right?
Youth has nothing to do with knowledge of the facts. And unless eyes are open and you take a moment to look at
the whole picture (and not down a tunnel at just limited few samples), lack of experience and being biased can make anyone appear to not know what they are talking about.
To suggest AMD has their crown back clearly indicates a tunnel vision point of view, lack of experience, or lack of knowledge - or a bit of all three.
The facts are, both processor makers make great processors that can help form the platform foundation for an excellent,
reliable computer that provides years of excellent service. And both makers produce many different processors that perform (and often compete) at different levels - levels that are not necessarily based on price-point.
Just because Brand A might have the best (whatever that means!) in one rating criteria, that IN NO WAY means "all" Brand A's processors are better than "all" the processors from Brand B. And because "best" can be subjective too - depending on which criteria the user (or reviewer) weighs most - what is best for you may be not best for me.
Does having more cores make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does being more efficient make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does having more overclocking headroom make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does producing less heat make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does having the fastest clock rate make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does having the best "game play" with a few select games make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does having the best tech support make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Does having a lower price make a processor best at everything? Nope.
Could I go on and on? Yup.
There's a reason why Ford, RAM, and Chevy all can legitimately claim their 1/2 ton pickups are #1. Its because they all are. One is best at towing, another at hauling, another is the most fuel efficient, another has the quietest cab, another is best at cornering, another at stopping, one sold more, one still have more on the road, and then another has the best acceleration. But not one is best at everything.
Folks need to take their blinkers/blinders off, stop seeing only red or blue and look at the big picture. understand
AND ACCEPT that there are many crowns to be had out there with many contenders in many different categories - when it comes to processors. And folks need to accept that what they consider to be the most important criteria when rating a processor may NOT be what others value most.
Take price for example. For so many years, so many users gave the crown to AMD because most of their processors were more affordable. That's just a fact. For me, price mattered but it rarely ever was the deciding factor. Why? Because the CPU is just one component in the computer. There is still the motherboard, graphics, case, PSU, drives, RAM, speakers, monitor, keyboard and mouse - all of which cost the same, regardless the cost of the processor. So you spend a bit more during the initial build, factor that in for the entire cost of the computer, and spread that cost over the life of the computer (I tend to keep mine 5 years), then any extra cost this CPU over that CPU because negligible. In some cases, better efficiency may even make up the difference over time, and then some!
You cannot say red is better than blue, or green better than yellow. You have to pick Brand A, Model CBA-2a and compare it head to head with Brand B Model 321-D4. Then pick which specific CPU (not brand, but specific CPU) is best based on the criteria that is most important to
you.
