Which is the best processor (AMD or Intel CPU) for HD video editing and encoding?

Coole Friend March 7, 2013

Which is the best processor (AMD or Intel CPU) for video editing and encoding? Which one is best for editing HD videos (AVCHD); the Intel Core i3 3220 Vs. AMD A10 5800k ?

  1. David
    August 26, 2013 at 10:54 am

    Of course Intel, to think that Apple computers has it. I believe their products are known to have great performance for video and graphic works. Which are most of the designers and professional uses. It's like comparing products made in Japan versus from China.

  2. Aniket Singh
    March 9, 2013 at 9:06 am

    both are good but i personnaly recomend intel......

  3. Adeel Azhar
    March 8, 2013 at 9:35 pm

    i would say AMD, using one right now.

  4. Nitesh Badala
    March 8, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    intel core i7 or 3rd generation core processor

  5. Hovsep Avedissian
    March 8, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    check this benchmark
    AMD A10-5800K APU scored 4,733
    Intel Core i3-3220 @ 3.30GHz scored 4,287

    A10-5800K vs. Core i3-3220 cpu review
    apparently if you do not play games they recommend Core i3-3220.

  6. Anish P
    March 8, 2013 at 1:14 pm

    I would recommend the Intel processor since it has proven to be better than the AMD in most benchmark tests between the two. Also, I'm not sure if this is true for this processor but many computers AMD processors tended to overheat in the past, whereas there haven't been many problems with Intel.

  7. Oron Joffe
    March 8, 2013 at 10:03 am

    "Best" is a question of many things. The best combination would probably be Intel i7 and a powerful graphics card, along with two SSDs (one for software, one for main project file) and a large hard disc for everything else... Realistically you need to look at what is available within your budget (and form factor, e.g. if you're thinking of doing this on a laptop). The newer "A" series from AMD are not as fast in general processing as their Intel counterparts (e.g. A4 vs i3), but have very good graphics built-in, and if your video editing suite makes good use of the graphic processor you may find you get better value from them.

  8. Alan Wade
    March 8, 2013 at 7:35 am

    More reading here:
    This points to Intel although I have always been happy with AMD. At the moment I have the Phenom II x6 processor which is IMO very good.

    But, here is a graph showing Intel way ahead.

  9. Neil Sharma
    March 8, 2013 at 6:36 am

    From tech forums, I have read that "Intel has a dedicated video compression cirtcuitry built in their chip which makes video compression much much faster than AMD."

    Source: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3345452

  10. DalSan Mack
    March 8, 2013 at 6:17 am

    It all depends on which programs you would use to edit and encode. Intel processors tend to be faster at processing data, but AMD has made great strides for making better graphics capabilities in which basic usage would not require getting a separate graphics accelerator card. Honestly, for better results, go with an Intel i5 and a moderate graphics accelerator card. If that is not possible, then go with what you can comfortably afford. AMD focuses more on gaming graphics and HD video graphics now than they do for pure processing power. The AMD FX series are better performing when out concerns processing power rather than graphics capabilities, but then the older Phenom II processors perform better still. Many software companies are finally jumping into utilizing graphics processing whenever possible, so keep that in mind. Intel processors are also much better performing when it concerns memory, meaning that the memory performance is a few times faster than the AMD APU's. This is a noticeable performance difference between the two, also. The AMD Phenom II x6 processor, which is much cheaper, combined with a nice graphics accelerator card, would outperform the A-10 in most ways, and would graphically be better than the i3 (since having a good GPU). The Phenom II CPU with the graphics card would probably be around the same price as either the i3 or the A-10. But, to answer your question (going by the fact that you did not state whether there would be a separate graphics card), overall performance may be better with the A-10. Data processing performance is better with the i3.

  11. Alexandra Momo
    March 8, 2013 at 4:28 am

    The best is the one who you think will last the longest and will be the most affordable for you. Have fun reading this and make up your mind.

  12. Junil Maharjan
    March 8, 2013 at 4:18 am

    I would go with Intel which has proven to be a faster of the two but AMD is not bad as well.

  13. Jan Fritsch
    March 8, 2013 at 3:47 am

    Reviews suggest they go pretty much head-to-head depending on the type of benchmark.
    The following link of the CPUs which shows that even an update of the used software may change the outcome of a direct comparison.

    If I had to make a (opinionated) call I would go for the Intel CPU. Deciding factors would be my general preference for Intel, the overall slightly better performance and the lower power consumption under load.

  14. null
    March 8, 2013 at 3:01 am

    intel cpu's are best for performance but amd is also good
    in video editing amd work same as intel
    but i suggest you to go with intel because there internal technologies are very good
    and also amd cpu's have overheating issues

    • Alexander Case
      March 8, 2013 at 8:36 pm

      amd will be cheaper, motherboards are cheaper... and you can afford a decent cooling system. although i have an amd A10 with the box cooler and use it for illustrator/photoshop/corel and i must say i feel better than with an i7 2600k. honestly ... with a good motherboard and a decent cooling .. amd's APU's are way better than a configuration with i3 .

Ads by Google