how compatible are AMD processors?

I had an old PC die the other day, and I'm trying to decide whether I should even replace it. I was looking around at prices and noticed the AMD stuff is much cheaper, and also that they're coming out with new stuff in July. So I'm wondering are there compatibility issues? They look pretty impressive for the cost. Regardless, I'll probably wait until after the new AMD stuff has been out for a bit, just in case Intel lowers prices in response.

Just curious as to AMD users' experiences. I'm not a gamer, fwiw. But I do run decent numbers of VMs at times, and I want something that will last -- this PC that died I built in 2008 and still worked pretty well for browsing the Internet.

I have to admit that I've always been an "Intel only" snob, but even I have to admit that I now would have no hesitation going with AMD. Rest assured that everyone tests to make sure that their software works with both Intel and AMD. In fact, there are some very positive things to be said for AMD lately such as the fact that they take far less of a performance hit mitigating issues such as Spectre than Intel incurs.

I'm sure others will voice their opinions as well, but I see no reason not to strongly consider AMD based systems these days.

Completely compatible.

AMD user here, no problems noted and I can run anything the Intel processors can. I too run multiple VMS at one time on my AMD processor with no issues.

Berton said:

Using an Intel-based computer, if you look in C:\Windows\WinSxS Folder you'll see a lot of folders that start with amd64, the pages here explain why:
amd64 at DuckDuckGo
It does help explain why there has to be compatibility.

To avoid any confusion:
AMD64 does not refer to an AMD processor but to the current 64 bit architecture.

Intel's entry into 64 bit was the Itanium processor. It showed promise but was a commercial failure. Today there are relatively few such computers and few operating systems that will run on it. This is high end server and workstation hardware.

AMD went a different route by designing 64 bit extensions to the 32 bit CPU instructions. AMD quite naturally called this architecture AMD64 and that is the name Microsoft uses.. It is also referred to as x86-64. Intel later obtained a license to produce processors with this architecture, as AMD had earlier for the x86 architecture.

There are significant differences between AMD and Intel processors but they matter primarily at the hardware level. They use different sockets. It isn't difficult for software to tell the difference but most doesn't have the need.

Software compatibility between AMD and Intel processors is near 100%. The biggest class of software that won't run on AMD systems is utility and information software designed specifically for Intel motherboards and processors. Of course with an AMD system you have no use for such.

I did some additional reading and found that Intel and AMD have cross-licensing agreements, thanks for the replies. I think I'll wait a few months and probably replace the dead PC with an AMD. I had one many, many years ago (early 90s), an old AMD 386-40, and it was great. It was a PC I built, and for the same amount I could get an Intel 486 w/ 4MB RAM or the AMD 386-40 with 16MB.

But I recall an employer in the late 90s who had some Windows desktops using Cyrix and maybe VIA processors that were total garbage. Lots of blue-screens on those machines.