Some years ago, Intel was the only real choice for a consumer-level CPU for serious productivity work, such as RAW image processing. Over the past year or so, though, AMD has really come to the fore—not necessarily for raw computing power, but for sheer value-for-money combined with good multi-core performance. At this point, Intel CPUs have more computing power per core, but AMD CPUs cost a lot less. For example, a 6-core 12-thread Intel Core i7 8700 will cost around $500, while a 6-core 12-thread AMD Ryzen 5 2600 will cost around $250. Same core count, same thread count; the Intel is more powerful, but doesn’t come with a CPU cooler (you would have to buy that separately, at additional cost), while the AMD does come with a decent CPU cooler. For a given budget, the AMD CPU will free up funds for use on other system components, such as memory or drives.
When I first heard about AMD’s Ryzen series of CPUs, I was somewhat dubious about whether they would pose a serious threat to Intel’s dominance, but they look to have proven their value over the past year. Perhaps just as importantly, the Ryzen series has shifted the norm upwards in terms of cores. For several years, dual-core CPUs were the mainstream CPUs, with quad-core CPUs at the high end. Now, six cores is rapidly becoming the norm, with eight cores at the high end. In essence, with an 8-core CPU, we are essentially getting two 4-core CPUs in one—a massive step up in computing power. This is excellent from a RAW image processing perspective, since good RAW conversion programs will make use of all available cores.
It’s a pity that AMD has yet to challenge nVidia in a similar way in the GPU scene. Competition is good for both product improvement and prices.