Intel or AMD?

Discussion in 'Performance Tweaking' started by ISP4, May 29, 2016.

  1. What Processor is better for minecraft? AMD or Intel? I'm trying to find one i found that Intel are more expensive than AMD but that must have a reason. Also what kind of core do you use?
     
  2. Wait, how did you do that?
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  3. :3 Whoops made that wrong. $25 for AMD Dedi and $30 for a Intel Dedi
     
  4. Intel has way better single core performance
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. You can check multiple benchmarks anywhere, Intel will ALWAYS perform better than AMD's counterparts. While AMD is okay for hosting websites and such due to the masses of cores that they have, this is not sufficient enough for Minecraft as it relies on a strong single thread in order to hold many players. AMD processors hosting Minecraft servers can be down however you will not see anywhere near the results that you would with Intel.

    Take the 4690k and the 8350 for example, both are at pretty much the same price point yet AMD only scores 1504 in CPUBenchmarks test while the i5 4690k scores 2234. You can see this for yourself here and also find how some others stack up compared to others.

    Upon visiting the site, you will also see that the best AMD processor available today in regards to single threaded performance only scores a measly 1775 while the adequatly priced 4790k is the best single performer with 2529.
     
    #5 DenyCC, May 31, 2016
    Last edited: May 31, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Intel. For minecraft, Intel. Honestly for mostly anything I'd go Intel on a dedi. Haven't had the best experience with AMD.

    Source: Had a dedi with 2x 8 core amd opteron's and 128GB of ram. Currently on an 1270v3.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Thank You all for your replies!

    I will be taking AMD as a bad company

    And Intel as the best for Minecraft out of Amd and Intel

    Thank You all!
     
  8. AMD has always been bad to me. An
    AMD I had started to smoke......
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. It's not necessarily a bad company, although single-thread performance isn't up-to par with Intel therefore being worst for your needs.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Minecraft's tick loop runs in a simple thread, and therefore single threaded performance is important for high TPS.
    Therefore, based on the PassMark Single Threaded CPU Benchmarks, the best CPU for minecraft is Intel i7-4790k.
    Intel E3 is second best, but i7-4790k is still the best.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Spigot utilizes many threads. The main thread is mainly used for AI/Logic. There is a thread pool (1-10+) for networking, async chat, async chunk saving/loading (Mostly), async IO operations such as saving player data, plugin async operations, annd the list goes on. I recommend you get the best of both worlds and grab yourself a E5-1650 v3 which would allow for more parallel threads at a semi-high clock! It also supports DDR4 ram but i doubt that'd make a noticeable difference on a minecraft server.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  12. Packets actually aren't processed on the main thread, those networking threads are just there to receive data from the OS and pass it off to the main thread.
    All entities, tile entities, players, and almost all bukkit events and packets are processed on the main thread. Async IO operations block, and don't take much CPU (the OS can have 1000s of blocked threads). Plugin sync operations are rarely parallel enough for E3 to make a difference (so the plugin's async tasks are single-threaded themselves).
    I can assure you that those other threads spend most of their time idle (Thread.sleep()) or blocked on IO.
    If your players care about TPS, then it makes sense to get an i7-4790k for maximum main thread performance (ticks are all run on the main thread).
    While there are other threads, they're rarely the bottleneck (except for GC), and its usually more important for better main thread performance.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. If you think sending/receiving thousands of TCP packets a second doesn't take a toll on the processor, you're mad. I believe the serializing/de-serializing is also done in the networking threads, although i'm not certain on this.

    I essentially said the same thing.

    That makes no sense.. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say, but many plugins (Such as AAC) offload massive calculations/IO to async threads to prevent disrupting the main thread.


    I personally utilize a E5-1650 v3 for EVERY server i own. This includes Jenkins, Minecraft servers, websites, and various other small web utilities. I came from the E3's and will never look back. The last E3 processor i used was a 1290v2, which did a good job, but is still out-performed by my E5-1650-v3 (Mind you i ran 4 servers on the same processor at the time, so it's not a very "fair" test).

    So if you have a single server with no other processes running, then sure go with a high clock processor. But if you're using more then 1 server, just grab a E5-1650-v3 or something with the ability to handle more then a couple of threads. I also want to point out you most likely wont even notice single thread performance unless you're doing micro benchmarks.
     
  14. Sending/receiving TCP packets isn't CPU intensive, its IO intensive. Threads (even netty threads) waiting for network input are going to spend most of their time blocked and waiting for packets to come.
    Plugins such as AAC attempt to offload some calculations to async threads, but in reality they don't do much compared to the main thread.
    Here is some profiling information I got from yourkit of a server under high load:
    [​IMG]
    As you can see, the server thread takes up the LARGE majority of the CPU time (136 thousand milliseconds of CPU time), with epoll coming in a very distant second at 2 thousand milliseconds of CPU time.
    You want to get that server thread going as fast as possible to maximize TPS.
     
  15. This is taken from a live server: https://i.gyazo.com/61a9b153f8f4500d89691a26fe9fd73a.png

    It's displaying a tree of threads in a single minecraft server instance. You're 100% correct that the main thread DOES in fact use the most resources, but you cannot deny that these servers do NOT rely on a single thread for optimal performance. The GC alone requires threads to properly run, and that certainly takes a toll on the processor. I am not denying that spigot is mostly single threaded but rather attempting to point out that having so little threads WILL bog down your main thread.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. MikeA

    MikeA Retired Moderator
    Retired Benefactor

    For a server use the Intel one, and since you said $25 - $30 I assume you're getting one of those dirt cheap servers, so the Intel one would probably be better.

    For desktop though, I love my AMD FX-8350.
     
  17. I'm just making an Example. I was getting one from Nocix but might use another company soon
     
  18. AMD or intel Are same choice of linux or windows.

    One reponce : what will you do with it?

    For server, and for minecraft intel are best.
    For personal computer and lambda user amd is a more best choice.

    if AMD was not there, the prices would not necessarily the same.

    By the past AMD, not ati, was a good proccessor, with ati it make a good low cost machine.
     
  19. Dude, your probably think about a Dual Intel Xeon 5XXX, let me stop you their, if you are going
    cheaper spend a bit more, to get something decent.

    Here some "better" options
    • Intel Xeon E3-1230v2
    • 4 Cores / 8 Threads
    • 3.2Ghz / 3.6Ghz Turbo
    • 32GB DDR3
    • 480GB SSD
    $55/MO

    Or an older I7
    • Intel Core i7-2600K
    • 4 Cores / 8 Threads
    • 3.4Ghz / 3.8Ghz Turbo
    • 16GB DDR3
    • 1TB SATA
    $40/MO

    You can get these at Dedispec. I have used them, they are great for the price :) They're DDoS protection is not great, but what can you expect for under $50.

    Also if you plan to run just small server, 3 or 4 friends. Just get a vps :) No need for a dedicated server. Most of the people here run networks or medium sized servers, so that's the general server level we suggest.