AMD quad core vs i5 3rd generation

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

a_t_u_l

Contributor
Hi
I am confused whether to buy amd a6 quad core 3420m with 512MB+ 1.5gb shared radeon GRAPHIC CARD memory or i5 3rd generation.
My usage would be home movie video editing and file transfer/ backup.
Please advise which is a better option under my budget of 32k.
 
Get the i5..you'll get a more powerful processor, better battery life, and faster video encoding.
 
I recently chose i5 over fx8250 due to the power consumption. since you are talking about laptops, core i5 has better tdp
(17w compared to 35w) hence better battery backup at the same speed. but core i5 has 2 physical cores with hyper threading.

though it wont make a lot of difference in gaming due to lack of physical cores, video editing is sure gonna get a boost on multiple cores.
 
I don't think the extra cores will help once you factor in Intel's quick sync. Encoding videos with it should be a lot faster than on anything with only an AMD processor.
 
booo said:
I recently chose i5 over fx8250 due to the power consumption. since you are talking about laptops, core i5 has better tdp
(17w compared to 35w) hence better battery backup at the same speed. but core i5 has 2 physical cores with hyper threading.

though it wont make a lot of difference in gaming due to lack of physical cores, video editing is sure gonna get a boost on multiple cores.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply, but I m not worried about the battery life.
 
ch@ts said:
I don't think the extra cores will help once you factor in Intel's quick sync. Encoding videos with it should be a lot faster than on anything with only an AMD processor.
Click to expand...

But some claim amd 4 cores r good for video editing, could you explain your views and understanding to your above post.
 
^^ Intel has a technology called quicksync which greatly accelerates video encoding.

Quick Sync Vs. APP Vs. CUDA : Intel?s Second-Gen Core CPUs: The Sandy Bridge Review

So if you use a software which supports quicksync, media encoding will be MUCH faster than AMD processors even if they have double the number of cores.

this technology is specifically for video encoding so if you talk about things like compressing data etc. more cores would be better but even if these scenario's, because Intel has better per core performance, the difference is negligible.
 
more cores are good for video encoding like x264. but again, these days video encoding is done over GPGPU. i.e., encoding over graphics card. at this point having a good graphics card makes alot of difference over having a good cpu. trust me, a movie which takes over 20hrs for two passes of x264 gets done in less than 1hr over radeon. I can tell this with experience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom