There’s no simple “AMD Ryzen is always better” or “Intel Core is always better” answer — it

depends on what you need (gaming, content creation, battery life, budget, etc.). I’ll give a
breakdown of strengths & weaknesses as of mid-2025, and some guidance on when one might
be better than the other. If you tell me your use case (gaming / office / laptop / budget), I can
recommend which one would suit you best.

How AMD Ryzen and Intel Core compare (2025)

Here are key differences and what each brand tends to do well:

Feature AMD Ryzen (latest) Intel Core (latest)

Multi-core / Very strong. Ryzen, especially the Ryzen 9 Also good, particularly with
Multi-threaded / 7 with many cores, excels in workloads hybrid architectures (P-cores
Performance like video editing, rendering, streaming, + E-cores) in recent gens.
multi-tabbing etc. Arda PC Blog+3Tom's Intel often has more cores in
Hardware+39meters+3 certain SKUs, which helps in
threaded tasks. Tom's
Hardware+2Arda PC Blog+2

Single-core Ryzen has improved a lot over time but in Strong in single-thread tasks,
performance / many cases Intel still leads slightly (or is which helps in high-fps
Gaming very close) in tasks that are very sensitive gaming, lower latency, etc.
to single-thread speed. However AMD’s Intel’s architecture choices
3D-V-Cache models close many of the give an edge here in many
gaps in gaming. Arda PC Blog+3Tom's scenarios. Tom's
Hardware+3Belbytes+3 Hardware+2System Plus+2

Power Often better, especially in Ryzen’s newer Because of hybrid cores and
Efficiency / generations where they use smaller aggressive boosting, Intel
Heat / process nodes (e.g. 5nm, etc.). This sometimes draws more power
Thermals means less power/heat for similar and produces more heat. This
performance in many cases. Tom's is especially so in high-end
Hardware+2Tech Updates+2 desktop models under load.
Tom's Hardware+2Arda PC
Blog+2

Value (Price vs AMD frequently trades well in value, Intel sometimes has cheaper
Performance) offering more “bang for buck” especially in options in certain tiers,
mid & high-mid tier for multi-threaded work. especially if you get a good
But some of their top end or new “X3D” deal. Also you may pay extra
models are expensive. Tom's for cooling or boards if you
Hardware+2System Plus+2 want overclocking or high
 TDP models. System Plus+1

Platform / AM5 platform from AMD gives good future Intel has introduced hybrid
Features upgrade path. Good support for core designs, often better
overclocking in many models. Some Ryzen single-thread clocks, lots of
chips include large cache (like 3D V- features (e.g. fast integrated
Cache) which helps gaming. Tom's graphics in some models,
Hardware+2TechLuno.com+2 AI/Neural units in newer
chips). Arda PC
Blog+2System Plus+2

When one might be better than the other

Here are cases / use-cases when you might choose AMD vs Intel:

● If you do a lot of multi-threaded work (video editing, rendering, compiling code,

heavy multitasking) → AMD Ryzen may give better overall throughput for the
price.

● If you want high-FPS gaming and care about the absolute best single-thread
performance, low latency → Intel might still have a slight edge in many
games, though AMD is catching up, especially with cache-boosted models.

● If you want good battery life (in laptops) or want your PC to run cooler/noisy less
→ AMD often wins in efficiency.

● If you’re on a tight budget, or want the best value per rupee/dollar → compare
specific models, but often AMD gives more in the midrange.

● If you plan to upgrade over time, consider the motherboard/socket/support. E.g. AMD’s
AM5 has decent forward support. Intel’s platform changes more often, which may force
more frequent motherboard changes.

Recent Verdicts / Trends (2025)

● According to recent comparisons, AMD wins more categories overall (gaming +
efficiency + value) in many “AMD vs Intel 2025” reviews. Tom's Hardware+1

● Intel still leads in single-thread or lightly threaded tasks, and continues to improve. Tom's
Hardware+1
 ● AMD’s newer chips (especially the ones with V-Cache or “X3D”) are strong contenders
even in gaming, closing gaps. TechLuno.com+1

My take: Which is “best” really depends on you

If I were you, I’d decide based on:

1. What will you use the computer for most? Gaming, video work, programming,
browsing, etc.

2. Budget — how much can you spend.

3. Laptop or Desktop — power, heat, battery matter more for laptops.

4. Do you care about future upgrades? If yes, consider platforms (socket, motherboard,
compatibility).

If you like, I can compare two specific CPUs (one AMD Ryzen vs one Intel Core) in price and
performance in India (Delhi), to see which is “better” for your money. Do you want me to do
that?

You said:
for gaming and media creation like software

ChatGPT said:

If your main uses are gaming + media creation (video editing, rendering, etc.), then here’s how
AMD Ryzen vs Intel Core stack up right now (2025), what matters most, and what I’d
recommend for you. If you tell me your budget I can suggest specific models too.

What really matters for gaming + media creation

When you want both gaming and content creation, some things matter more:

Component / Important for gaming Important for creation (video

Spec editing, rendering, etc.)

Single-core Helps with frame rates in games, Also helps in exports,

speed / clock especially CPU-bound ones, scrubbing timeline, effects that
responsiveness, lower latency. are single-threaded.
 Core & thread Less important once you have enough Very important. More cores /
count — many games don’t use super many threads = faster rendering,
cores. video effects, multitasking.

Cache (especially Big cache helps reduce latency, Helps in certain workloads, but
large L3, V-Cache improves frame rates in “CPU-heavy” less dramatic. Creation tasks
etc.) gaming situations. AMD’s “X3D / V- tend to scale more with
Cache” chips give big gaming gains. cores/threads than cache.

Memory, RAM Faster RAM and good I/O help load Critical: fast storage, enough
speed, I/O (PCIe, times, texture streaming etc. RAM, good I/O to move large
SSD speed) video files etc.

Efficiency / If chip draws too much power, heat Over long render jobs,
power / heat can throttle performance. Good cooling efficiency & cooling matter a
helps. lot. You don’t want your system
overheating or slowing down.

How AMD & Intel compare for this mix in 2025

Based on recent reviews & benchmarks:

● AMD has pulled ahead in many gaming benchmarks with its latest X3D / V-Cache chips.
They tend to provide very high FPS especially when paired with good GPUs, thanks to
large L3 cache etc. Tom's Hardware+2Belbytes+2

● In content creation / multi-threaded tasks, AMD also shines: more cores/threads, good
thermal design, stability. Especially in rendering, video export, 3D rendering etc.
ENEBA+3roboticstechc.org+3Phone Mantra+3

● Intel still keeps advantages in some single-threaded tasks, and has features like Quick
Sync (hardware encoder), and its hybrid core designs that help background tasks + light
workloads. This can help in real-world productivity and tasks like streaming or encoding
while gaming etc. Digital Tech & Productivity Tips+2ENEBA+2

But overall, many sources are leaning toward AMD being the “better all-rounder” especially
once you go beyond entry level. The improvements in AMD chips (especially with V-Cache)
have closed or exceeded gaps in many areas. Tom's Hardware+2roboticstechc.org+2

What I’d recommend (for you)

Given you want both gaming and media creation:
 ● If your budget allows, go for an AMD Ryzen processor from the X3D/V-Cache line (e.g.
Ryzen 7/9 X3D). These tend to give excellent gaming, and enough cores for media
work.

● If you prefer Intel (maybe because of features you need, or deals available), pick a high-
end Intel Core (K-series or Ultra / latest gen) with lots of performance cores. But make
sure cooling is good.

● Aim for 16-24 threads at least, if you will do video editing / rendering. For gaming, those
extra threads won’t always help, but for creation they will.

● Don’t neglect the rest of the system: get fast SSDs, enough RAM (32 GB is a good
target for video editing), good GPU if editing uses GPU acceleration, good cooling, etc.

If you tell me your budget in India (₹), I can suggest a few AMD & Intel CPUs / builds which
give good value for gaming + media creation. Do you want me to pick some for ~₹ 40-60k /
₹60-80k / etc?

You said:
suggest one of them

ChatGPT said:

If I were you (gaming + media creation), here’s a good CPU suggestion (with trade-offs) and a
few alternatives. If you tell me your budget I can narrow further.

Recommended CPU
One of the best “all-rounders” for what you want is the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D.

Why this one:

● It has a lot of cores/threads, which helps in media tasks (video editing, rendering) very
well.

● The “3D V-Cache” gives it large cache, which helps with gaming performance (especially
in CPU-intensive games).

● Good performance per watt compared to many very high-end Intel chips.

If that is too costly or overkill, there are lower cost options that still give strong gaming + creation
performance.
Other solid choices
Here are some CPUs that balance performance & cost and will do well for both gaming &
content creation. Prices in India vary, but these give you good options:

Intel Core i5-12400F

₹12,045
•
EliteHubs.com + others

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

₹9,409
•
Computech Store + others

AMD Ryzen 5 5500

₹7,309
•
Amazon.in

● Intel Core i5-12400F: Good mid-range pick. 6 P-cores + other cores deliver good
gaming performance and decent content creation capability. If paired with a decent
GPU, fast RAM, and SSD, this will serve well.

● AMD Ryzen 5 3600: Older generation but still capable. 6 cores/12 threads, good for
light- to moderate video editing, streaming, etc. Might be a bottleneck in heavier creation
loads but good value.

● AMD Ryzen 5 5500: Even more budget-oriented. Will be okay for 1080p gaming +
lighter creation tasks. Probably the minimum I'd lean towards for both gaming + media
work.

If you tell me your budget in INR (for CPU only or for the full build), I can pick the “sweet spot”
CPU + motherboard combo that gives you best performance per rupee. Do you want me to
suggest that?
You said:
best gpu brand

ChatGPT said:

There’s no one “best GPU brand” for everyone — it depends what features you want (gaming,
media/editing, ray-tracing, upscaling, driver stability, etc.). But I can compare the main brands
(Nvidia, AMD, Intel) and tell you which is usually “best” depending on priorities. Then you can
pick for you.

Major Brands & How They Compare

Here are the strengths & weaknesses of the big GPU brands as of 2025.

Brand Strengths Weaknesses / Trade-offs

Nvidia • Excellent ray-tracing performance. • Can be more expensive per frame

(GeForce / RTX • Very strong upscaling / frame or per watt vs AMD in many price
series) boosting technologies like DLSS. tiers.
• Lots of support in creative software • VRAM sometimes less generous
(CUDA, good driver support). (or more expensive) for certain mid-
• Generally good power efficiency in range cards.
high-end performance. • Very high power draw and cost at
• Strong premium / enthusiast the absolute top end.
options.

AMD (Radeon / • Usually better value for raw • Ray-tracing and AI/upscaling
RX series) rasterization performance (without features are catching up, but often
ray-tracing) in many mid & high mid lag slightly behind Nvidia’s in quality
tiers. or performance.
• Tends to offer more VRAM at • Power consumption & heat in
similar price points. some models can be higher.
• Good competition, especially in • Driver stability and feature
standard gaming + creative maturity historically a bit behind
workloads. Nvidia, though improving.
• Features like “FSR” for upscaling,
and often better price-to-
performance in non-ray-traced
workloads.
• Vendors often cheaper/discounts
may be better.

Intel (Arc / • Offers some budget / entry / mid- • Still relatively new in discrete GPU
Battlemage range options which can be space.
etc.) competitive in price. • Feature set and performance often
• Good potential especially for lag behind Nvidia / AMD at similar
creators / media-editing if software price tiers, especially high end.
support improves more. • Driver support, ecosystem &
• Good features are being added, tooling still maturing.
and competition helps push others. • Less “headroom” in performance
for top-tier gaming or 4K / ray
tracing vs Nvidia’s best.

What matters for you (gaming + media creation)

Since you want both gaming and media creation, here are features you should care about,
and which brand tends to do better in each:

Feature Why it matters Which brand generally better

(or competitive)

Rasterization Most games still rely heavily on AMD often gives better cost-per-
performance this; you’ll want higher FPS. frame in many mid-to-high tiers.
(games without ray- Nvidia too, but more expensive.
tracing)

Ray-tracing For games that support it (e.g., Nvidia is ahead here; AMD is
newer AAA titles), having ray improving, but generally trails.
tracing gives better visuals. Also
useful in creative tasks that
simulate lighting.

Upscaling / frame Helps increase FPS/resolution Nvidia’s DLSS is often considered

boosting using smart interpolation or AI ahead, but AMD’s FSR & newer
(DLSS, FSR etc.). Useful for media tech are competitive.
too (if you do rendering or video
which benefit from these).

CUDA / Software Many creative applications (Adobe Nvidia tends to be stronger in this
ecosystem for suite, Blender, etc.) make use of regard; AMD works too, but some
media GPU compute. Nvidia has strong software favors Nvidia.
software support (CUDA etc.).

VRAM (video For video editing, 3D work, big AMD often gives more VRAM at a
memory), memory textures, high resolution gaming, given price, which is useful.
bandwidth more VRAM helps; also helps Nvidia sometimes trades off raw
future-proof. VRAM in mid-range to keep
 features or power use favorable.

Power / heat / Less noise, better thermal Nvidia often more efficient at very
efficiency behavior, more sustainable long high performance, but in mid-tiers
sessions (rendering, recording, AMD can be competitive.
gaming).

My view: “Best” Brand

If I had to pick one brand as “best overall” for gaming + media creation, I’d lean Nvidia, simply
because:

● Its superior ray tracing + upscaling tech gives more visual polish in games.

● Strong support for creative software and GPU-accelerated media tasks.

● Efficiency and maturity (drivers, features) are generally better.

But—“best” doesn’t always mean “most expensive.” For many users, AMD might give almost as
much performance for significantly less cost, especially if full ray tracing or maximum features
aren’t critical.

If your budget is tight or you don’t need cutting-edge ray tracing, AMD might be better “value for
money.”

If you like, I can list a few specific GPU models (from both Nvidia and AMD) that hit the best
balance for gaming + media creation under your budget (₹ / USD). Do you want me to do that?

You said:
far cry can run in which graphics settings in AMD RYZEN 2600 processor and rtx 2060

ChatGPT said:

Got it 👍 You have an AMD Ryzen 5 2600 (6 cores, 12 threads) + NVIDIA RTX 2060 (6 GB
VRAM). That’s still a very solid combo for modern gaming at 1080p and even some 1440p.

Here’s how Far Cry games generally run on this setup (assuming you have 16 GB RAM and an
SSD):

Far Cry 5 / Far Cry New Dawn

 ● 1080p: Ultra settings → 80–110 FPS.

● 1440p: High/Ultra → 60–80 FPS.

● Very well optimized for Ryzen + RTX; smooth at high settings.

Far Cry 6
This game is more demanding and uses more VRAM.

● 1080p: High/Ultra → 55–75 FPS. (Ultra HD textures may stutter due to only 6
GB VRAM, so keep texture pack off.)

● 1440p: Medium/High → 50–60 FPS.

● Turn off ray tracing (RTX 2060 struggles with it here).

● AMD FSR can help boost FPS if you want smoother gameplay.

Graphics Settings Recommendations

For best experience (Far Cry 6 as the heaviest example):

● Resolution: 1080p (native).

● Textures: High (not Ultra HD pack).

● Shadows / Environment: High.

● Anti-Aliasing: TAA.

● Ray Tracing: Off (too heavy for RTX 2060).

● Upscaling (FSR / DLSS in supported titles): Use “Quality” mode for more FPS if
needed.

✅ Conclusion:

● Far Cry 5 / New Dawn → Ultra at 1080p, smooth.

 ● Far Cry 6 → High at 1080p, ~60 FPS, no RTX, avoid Ultra HD textures.

Do you want me to also suggest the best optimized settings (balance between visuals + FPS)
for Far Cry 6 specifically on your Ryzen 2600 + RTX 2060?

You said:
for farcry 5

ChatGPT said:

Perfect 👍 For Far Cry 5 with your Ryzen 5 2600 + RTX 2060 + 16GB RAM, you can expect
excellent performance at 1080p. Here’s the breakdown:

Performance in Far Cry 5

● 1080p Ultra settings: ~90–110 FPS (very smooth).

● 1440p Ultra settings: ~65–75 FPS.

● 4K High settings: ~40–50 FPS (playable but not ideal).

Far Cry 5 is very well optimized and doesn’t demand ray tracing (since it came out before RTX
features). Your setup is more than enough.

Recommended Settings for Best Experience (1080p)

● Preset: Ultra (you can run this smoothly).

● Textures: Ultra.

● Shadows: Ultra.

● Geometry/Vegetation: Ultra.

● Anti-Aliasing: TAA (best balance of sharpness + performance).

● V-Sync: Off (unless you want to cap FPS to 60/75/144 depending on monitor).

● Motion Blur: Personal preference (most gamers turn it off).

✅ Conclusion:
Your Ryzen 2600 + RTX 2060 can run Far Cry 5 on Ultra at 1080p with 90–100+ FPS,
smooth gameplay without tweaking. At 1440p, you can still play Ultra with ~70 FPS.

Want me to also share the optimized settings for Far Cry New Dawn (the sequel, slightly
heavier but similar engine) on your same setup?