AMD or Intel

[Stacey]

Hello all. I am new to this forum and thought it would be an excellent place to ask a question. I have pretty much owned AMD computers for all of my adult life, and was thinking of going with an Intel, but they are so varied. I have been watching the i7 4790K processor for a while, and noticed that a website was selling the i7 5820K for about the same price. After looking at the benchmark scores on this site, I noticed that the 5820K had a higher mark then the 4790k, even though its speed is only 3.3ghz vs the 4790K's 4.0ghz. Can someone explain what the differences are between these processors. I guess I was always one of those that looked at the *ghz speed to determine the quickness, but I am thinking that is probably not the best way to judge speed. My next question is how AMD compares to Intel. I was also looking at the AMD FX-9590, which says its benchmark is lower, but has a speed of 4.7 ghz. As a point of interest, it is also about 100.00 cheaper then the i7 4790K. Which is better to go with? My current system has an AMD 1090T CPU with an Asus Formula V motherboard. Nothing really special. When I build my new system, I do not plan on gaming, but I would like to have the capability if I decide I want to start. I also want to see my system boot a lot quicker then it does. My new system will have a 750W power supply, 240GB SSD w/1TB HDD, and a minimum of 8GB ram. I would most likely start out with integrated video until I can get the money to get a good video card (if you would have a recommendation on a good video card that would go easy on the wallet, it would also be greatly appreciated), and a liquid cooler for the CPU. Any help, advice, or knowledge concerning this post would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Stacey

[David (PassMark)]

The AMD FX-9590 uses a huge amount of power. Up to 220W. Which is a result of the high clock speed. This means more ongoing costs, more cooling requirements & more noise.

Both the 4790K and 5820K are fast CPUs. In normal use you won't notice much difference.

Here is a comparison of the i7 4790K and i7 5820K

Looking at the clock speed alone hasn't been a good indication of performance for some years now.

Don't forget to have a look at the single threaded charts
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

[clm]

Just to expand a bit on David's advice:
The general CPU scores are much more applicable to multi-threaded applications:
such as video editing, photoshop, transcoding, any 3D content creation or CAD software, statistical analysis, FEA analysis... all of those apps can use all the cores available... but most common applications rarely ever use more than a single core.
For general gaming and business applications, 2D design, and anything "old" (windowsXP era), you should only concern yourself with single-threaded performance.
For example, if you aren't looking to max out the system memory on your computer, then it's not likely you're running something that would need the i7 5820k. You'd be fine with the i7 4790k, and could even save $100 by using the i5-4690k, whose single-thread scores are quite excellent (and by adding a $35 aftermarket cooler, could be coaxed up to the 2,500 score of the i7 cpu) Our performance 2D workstation has done remarkably well with the i5 and a cheap air cooler. We use AMD APU's for all the lightweight workstations running office apps, since performance was not required.