Intel vs amd linux reddit. It's a component built into all current Intel chipsets.

Intel vs amd linux reddit I was pretty plugged in like 6 months ago and didn't see a single thing indicating support in the Linux side Premiere detects AMD builds and configures accordingly. Yes. And in case with Linux, AMD GPUs is also generally a better choice. I am currently using Arch on an AMD CPU / AMD GPU setup, but my Wi-Fi card is Intel. Intel 10th/11th gen), then AMD wins in everything except not having Thunderbolt so it's an easy choice then, just buy AMD. if you are on a budget the AMD RX 6000 series or their RX 6050 refresh are probably your best bet at the moment since they are already 1~2 year old almost every linux distro support them fully out of the box and you typically get more rasterization performance for the same price compared to Nvidia cards (around 10~20% or something depending on the budget) So i am in the market for a new laptop and wondering which chipset /cpu/ gpu will be better for install Linux Mint 21. Jul 23, 2023 · Neither AMD nor Intel would release a CPU without solid upstream Linux support; the server market is too important and depends on it. However, I'd say this is pretty typical linux experience on very new hardware. Haven't had an issue on wayland yet. I've had some success in doing this thus far, with AMD FX8350 + Asus board, and nvidia GPU. . And I believe an AMD GPU and Intel Wi-Fi card tandem is the key to have a hassle-free experience. It's a component built into all current Intel chipsets. The games I plan to host are very single-core performance focused so I'm focusing on CPUs with good single-core performance which according to my research is almost always Intel CPUs. With Intel if needed you can take advantage of the build in GPU for HW transcoding. You can get a good motherboard and cooling solution to overclock. AMD still offers the best bang for the buck, imo. Intel chip all the way. Linux kernel support: Both Intel and AMD contribute to the Linux kernel, so both CPUs are well-supported by Linux. AMD problems are almost everywhere on newer linux laptops. Nvidia is better only in specific scenarios like raytracing (though it still hit the performance hard even on Nvidia) or most of the workloads. Intel beats them in raw performance most of the time but let's be honest: there are few cases where a home machine really benefits from the amount of processing power available now-a-days. So, no, there's not a general preference for one or the other. AMD with iGPU (i. It's autonomous, runs at all times that the motherboard is powered on, contains its own complete operating system (in IME's case, based on MINIX 3), and has external network access. Hi, I'm planning on building a home server to use for hosting game servers (mostly Minecraft and Team Fortess 2) and a Plex server. AMD and Intel graphics work better on Linux than they work on Windows. I recently saw a Razer laptop video running Linux and the reviewer said intel iGPU support in Linux is bad and the battery optimization is also bad in Linux. AMD is the best in fps per euro most of the time. The comparison matches up for prices, the one main difference is Intel vs AMD. Intel vs AMD - this mainly comes down to config, I don't yet know if there is a performance difference in doing IOMMU with these. Go with AMD! Intel devices nowadays have to much catch up to do in the heat management and battery life departments. Other than that, Intel is usually a bit better single core performance while AMD is a bit better multicore, especially during longer loads (where intel devices just become from bad to worse). Where Windows users may shy away from AMD and Intel, there's absolutely no reason to do so with Linux . "Intel Management Engine". For you basic setup either is probably fine but you will have more options to future proof the Intel chip. As I browse laptop catalogues, all I see is pre-installed Windows with Intel processors costing me an arm and a leg. With the rest AMD is still the king. At the same time, the AMD CPU is a much better CPU than the intel choice. If buying 1 or 2 generations old (AMD 4000/5000 series vs. So I guess the decision comes down to that. AMD's integrated graphics are also notably better performing over Intel's. Whichever you like. e. Notably, you are most likely going to face sleep/hibernation issues, gpu glitches, and inappropriate p-state performance behavior. Plus all are 65W. The Intel CPU is a much less radical change, so it should be a smoother experience. AMD & Intel are both very well supported, although 12th gen Intel is just getting better and better in the Linux Kernel. Intel drivers are great, on par with AMD except on 3d games, and even there they're close. So far, everything works out of the box. Which one of these cpu's would be spot on to go with RTX 3060Ti and RTX 3080? EDIT: Decided to go with i5-12600 and RTX 3060Ti. ThinkPad E15 Gen 4 Intel (15”) - Mineral Metallic. I don't know which I'd choose if buying new haven't really looked into it. I am not planning to play games on it, just Android development which both Virtualization features works great with qemu install. AMD processor. May 15, 2022 · They basically perform slightly differently in reality, with the more expensive intel being slightly better at performing in certain scenariosand amd was well known for being better at Apr 3, 2023 · I am wondering if there is much difference between the Intel and AMD models in terms of the general stability and completeness of the Linux support? I’m thinking about the thunderbolt ports, web camera, microphone, fingerprint reader, TPM, sleep, etc. For gaming on Linux AMD is the better choice. If buying new, Intel is more powerful overall, AMD runs cooler and gets better battery life per watt/hour. Intel CPUs with GPUs built in transcode AMD doesnt work for it last I checked Edit: news to me that amd works for hardware transcoding. Just to name a few things: Standard ACPI platform profiles are supported and work well Intel is better that AMD when doing hardware media decoding - AMD also can do AV1 but less power efficient than Intel. I myself I'm very happy with my Premiere performance on a mere Legion 5 Pro, which allows me to deliver fully edited, air-ready TV shows. The idea is to pick a laptop with iGPU and everything either Intel or AMD. vs ThinkPad E15 Gen 4 AMD (15”) - Mineral Metallic (More expensive, but 1Tb vs 512GB) AMD is OK if you're running a VM with other machines + dGPU, but if it's a standalone Plex machine, I say go Intel. Both Intel and AMD have good support for Linux but for most bang for your buck go with AMD. Linux support is also better on the AMD board. As the t490 is a very old laptop, I would assume the amd support quality has at least improved a bit over these years. I'd probably do what @f33dm3bits said and go for the processor which offers the most bang per buck. Some context: I recently migrated from Windows to Ubuntu where I have used Intel all my life. That way you can get back that 1-5 fps lost and still get the cheaper CPU. I would go AMD because their CPUs are simply superior in mostly all aspects compared to intel, plus intel is often expensive (the mainboards are almost all the time more expensive for instance), and with AMD you can keep your mobo for multiple generations. And AMD performed better in his previous Razer but I hear lots of driver issues in AMD gpu in Linux and their support for features in Linux compared to windows is subpar. Not as good as Windows 11's 12th gen Intel support. Dec 11, 2019 · AMD seemed to be ahead of Intel and seemed to be better for overclocking. My test laptop uses an AMD processor, and I've installed roughly two dozen distros on that computer over the last few years without any issues. Multi-core performance: AMD CPUs have more cores than Intel CPUs, which can be beneficial for applications that can take advantage of multiple cores, such as video editing and rendering. Both Intel and AMD have a good track record of providing current, working drivers to the kernel. Typically one can get more power for money with AMD, but with AMD cards being better at GPGPU processing, I don't know if they're cheaper right now. In terms of missing drivers, other components are far more problematic. NVidia also has a Studio set of drivers suited for these specific purposes. AMD is better because the performance is dramatically better, both cpu and gpu, but Intel is very compatible and works well, have a lenovo yoga 7i or so and it works perfectly out of the box. This can't be done with the AMD chip and you can't take advantage of this. One more point for Linus users of Blender - AMD built-in GPU is supported by Blender for rendering, Intel is not - Intel OneApi works only with discrete Arc GPU. Only wondering what air cooler should I pair with it PS: in the specific case on Framework, it appears that the firmware is more mature on the AMD side, likely thanks to the deep collaboration with AMD. Also, all 8 cores/16 threads on AMD are full fat - No e/p core nonsense as with Intel. maybe it will change with I plan to purchase a new laptop and conflicted between Intel vs. If you do any kind of virtualization you'll want to avoid the e/p core split - Intel's e cores are not only slower but have different feature sets from the p cores, causing problems i5-12400, 12500, 12600, i7-12700 vs AMD 5600x Which one is better? All of these Intel cpu's have integrated graphics card except for AMD 5600x. 5600G) may work in Windows because Plex does support D12 transcoding as a fallback. It's why I don't mind waiting a few months for the AMD Framework. Almost there. AMD generally works better for the consumer side in regards of Linux's compatibility, but for the professional and workstation cards, then Nvidia (Quadro, Tesla, RTX A) beats AMD (Radeon Pro, Instinct) by thousands of miles. lyq dezsc exhqw toacwuh emfthh ezmnzc lnlmna pzlqkk tlhocl fvd