AMD video cards

Liam Proven lproven at gmail.com
Sat Jul 9 15:55:32 UTC 2016


On 9 July 2016 at 17:19, Dave Stevens <geek at uniserve.com> wrote:
> well, with bang for the buck I always take cost into account.


The discussion was about a PC with multiple discrete graphics cards.

If someone is using a separate graphics card, then an Intel processor
will give better CPU performance *for the money spent on the CPU* than
an AMD processor will.

AMD only wins if the whole system is down around US$200-300 and there
is no budget for a separate GPU.

AMD APUs easily outperform Intel's low-end Atom CPUs, for instance,
but [a] the Atom line has been discontinued now and [b] Atoms were
only intended for netbooks and so on, not for general-purpose
desktops.

However, $ for $, even a Core i3 will outperform an AMD APU of around
the same price _if_ the on-board GPU of both is not being used.

Personally, I don't play video games, so I don't really care about GPU
performance. I am happy with the performance of my Core i5's Intel
HD3000 GPU driving twin 23" LCDs.

AMD wins on _onboard_ GPU performance, yes.
-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)



More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list