Tuesday, June 11th 2013

AMD Unleashes First-Ever 5 GHz Processor

AMD today unveiled its most powerful member of the legendary AMD FX family of CPUs, the world's first commercially available 5 GHz CPU processor, the AMD FX-9590. These 8-core CPUs deliver new levels of gaming and multimedia performance for desktop enthusiasts. AMD FX-9000 Series CPUs will be available initially in PCs through system integrators.

"At E3 this week, AMD demonstrated why it is at the core of gaming," said Bernd Lienhard, corporate vice president and general manager, Client Products Division at AMD. "The new FX 5 GHz processor is an emphatic performance statement to the most demanding gamers seeking ultra-high resolution experiences including AMD Eyefinity technology. This is another proud innovation for AMD in delivering the world's first commercially available 5 GHz processor."

"AMD continues to push the envelope when it comes to desktop capabilities and power performance," said Wallace Santos, CEO and founder of MAINGEAR. "In unveiling the world's first 5 GHz 8-core CPU, AMD continues to lead the way in innovation while providing our customers with a best-in-class experience. We are thrilled to be part of this exciting launch."

The new 5 GHz FX-9590 and 4.7 GHz FX-9370 feature the "Piledriver" architecture, are unlocked for easy overclocking and pave the way for enthusiasts to enjoy higher CPU speeds and related performance gains. Additionally, these processors feature AMD Turbo Core 3.0 technology to dynamically optimize performance across CPU cores and enable maximum computing for the most intensive workloads.

AMD was the first to break the 1 GHz barrier in May of 2000 and continues to set the standard in technology innovation including the first Windows compatible 64-bit PC processor and the first native dual-core and quad-core processors. AMD also introduced the first APU (unifying CPU and Radeon graphics on the same chip) and the first x86 quad-core SoC, continuing forward with HSA architectures and programming models.

The new AMD FX CPUs will be available from system integrators globally beginning this summer. Two models will be available:
  • FX-9590: Eight "Piledriver" cores, 5 GHz Max Turbo
  • FX-9370: Eight "Piledriver" cores, 4.7 GHz Max Turbo
Add your own comment

147 Comments on AMD Unleashes First-Ever 5 GHz Processor

#1
bim27142
So... AMD is back on the GHz race now... :roll:
Posted on Reply
#2
Fourstaff
by: de.das.dude
ahem, the 8350 is pretty competitive with the 3770, and this is pile driver, not bulldozer.
and synthetic benchmarks dont mean shit.
Depends on what metric you are using.
Posted on Reply
#3
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: Fourstaff
Depends on what metric you are using.
Most multithreaded apps do rather like piledriver.
Posted on Reply
#4
Velvet Wafer
last week i tested a Powercolor 7950 V2 vs which was built in Calendar week 5 of 2010! (my old 6970 was built in calendar week 15 of 2010!!) It only had 58% Asic Quality, lowest i have ever found but if they had functional 28nm, even in GPU segment, over 3 years ago...in V2! they are years in front of what they show the public.

so, what now? ;)
Posted on Reply
#5
Vinska
by: Velvet Wafer
last week i tested a Powercolor 7950 V2 vs which was built in Calendar week 5 of 2010! (my old 6970 was built in calendar week 15 of 2010!!) It only had 58% Asic Quality, lowest i have ever found but if they had functional 28nm, even in GPU segment, over 3 years ago...in V2! they are years in front of what they show the public.

so, what now? ;)
And the FX-8320 I've bought in 2012Q4 was made in in 2011.
Now *add many more examples here*

Well, yes - they only release stuff after they get a f***ton made + other sh*t. It often takes more than a year for chips to be released after they start making them.
So, what's Your point?
(On the same note - I also bet Your ass both Volcanic Islands and Steamrollers were already being produced for a while now.)
Posted on Reply
#6
Recus
by: Vinska
But getting a girlfriend would mean spending a lot of money on her [both directly and indirectly]. Meanwhile, that money could be spent on much more important things - like these kind of chips, for example.
I know somebody turn their fists into girlfriend, but this...

Posted on Reply
#7
Vinska
@Recus
You should add a boner going in from behind on the Xbone one, a face that feels like "meh" on the PS4 one and make the AMD one to be an awesome one PLUS trippy eyes and a f***ton of swag around, w/ a bunch of weed around.
Posted on Reply
#8
D007
Lol only a month ago I said. "Haswell,? Unless it has a standard 5 ghz, I'm not even considering upgrading.. Well done AMD.
Posted on Reply
#9
HumanSmoke
by: Vinska
@Recus
You should add a boner going in from behind on the Xbone one.
:wtf:
Why? Because it represents some kind of compulsive disorder, or because it calls to your artistic side ?
Posted on Reply
#10
DigitalUK
This is more than just high binning, ive used a fair few piledriver 8350's and none of them would do 5Ghz on 1.5v stable (by stable i mean prime or ibt and core temps 62c or under) and you sure as hell wont get anywhere near 5ghz on stock cooling. if they are 5Ghz with turbo stock as with every other Bulldozer/Piledriver (8core) chip ive ever had should be able to get 5.5Ghz out of it easy with good cooling.
Posted on Reply
#11
TheinsanegamerN
by: drdeathx
Guess again
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
Posted on Reply
#12
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: TheinsanegamerN
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
Pass what you have been smoking. :laugh: Their mobile chips at load pull that. You sir are being rather fanboyish and making statistics up.
Posted on Reply
#13
Vinska
Yeah, what cdawall said.
Posted on Reply
#14
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
by: TheinsanegamerN
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
You should start providing proof of that because that's the biggest load of crap I've heard. 5-10% is the difference in IPC between the two CPUs and I seriously doubt that any i5 could achieve this while under-volting it. Not to mention that a 50% increase in clock would overcome a 5-10% drop on single threaded performance only so you're numbers are a bit contradictory my friend.

I expect to see two pictures with multi-meters to be proving your point if you're going to make such a claim.
Posted on Reply
#15
Fourstaff
by: cdawall
Pass what you have been smoking. :laugh: Their mobile chips at load pull that. You sir are being rather fanboyish and making statistics up.
I want some of your good stuff too, a loaded 3570K 4.0Ghz takes in more than 100w from the wall. At least among those I have seen (relatively few, I must admit).
Posted on Reply
#16
Dent1
by: TheinsanegamerN
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
Your logic is backwards, Intel's most formidable advantage is just in gaming. AMD dominates most other tasks in the same price bracket.

I would rather lose 5-10% in gaming, and gain 5-10% in everything else.
Posted on Reply
#17
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
by: TheinsanegamerN
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
ahh but you see, the AMD has dragons in its CPU (which is why tehy symbolize with the dragon thing)
Dragons breathe fire, and fire causes more heat. i bet if you ask the fellow dragon you are seeing around you now, he will confirm the same
Posted on Reply
#18
DigitalUK
i thought it was scorpions in the FX chips, dragons were in the phenom II's
Posted on Reply
#19
drdeathx
by: TheinsanegamerN
yeah, a 5-10% performance lead in stuff like 3d rendering isnt worth losing the same amount of performance in everything else, and drawing more than double the power of an equivalent intel chip. the 125 watt fx 8350 drew over 184 watts at full load, so i cant imagine how much this thing must gulp down. my i5, running at 4 GHz while undervolted, only pulls about 40 watts. and the 5 ghz 8350 can barely keep up, while pulling over 200 watts. not worth it in any sense of the word.
Guess again... You don't get why they released this chip do ya?
Posted on Reply
#20
Fourstaff
by: Dent1
Your logic is backwards, Intel's most formidable advantage is just in gaming. AMD dominates most other tasks in the same price bracket.

I would rather lose 5-10% in gaming, and gain 5-10% in everything else.
Or you can get best of both worlds with 4770k: better gaming and better multi threaded. For a premium of course.
Posted on Reply
#21
theoneandonlymrk
by: Fourstaff
Or you can get best of both worlds with 4770k: better gaming and better multi threaded. For a premium of course.
I don't see any 4770ks doing 5ghz and anyone can get the max from a 4770k , its 4.3 ;) :p
Posted on Reply
#22
MLScrow
I think AMD would be making a big mistake releasing this chip. If they are going to make an enthusiast chip, they need to apply this to a Steamroller part, not Piledriver cores. We all know the performance of an 8350, we don't need one with a higher clock rate, what we need is a Steamroller FX chip. Chop chop!

Edit: Okay, so looking back on my original 'wrench in the mix' post, I perhaps shouldn't have used the word "mistake". I should replaced it with "disappointment".

To me, even though it's a good thing that they have matured their process to the point where they can turn up the speed on their existing enthusiast chip, as an AMD fan I say, "Big deal." They're turning up the speed on an architecture that we all know is lacking. I am one of the biggest AMD enthusiasts I know and Bulldozer was one of the biggest let downs/disappointments ever. I retain my PII@4GHz, because Bulldozer wasn't even an upgrade. Single core IPC was terrible in comparison. We were all facepalming. So we waited, for Piledriver, hoping that it would redeem AMD, but when it came out, yeah, it was better, but it was still lackluster. Only a small jump in performance. They said it would use much less power, but it uses almost the same. It's still the power hungry, weak single core IPC, CPU we all know. The improvements are nice, but not enough to make a fan like me finally jump out of my chair with excitement.

Steamroller on the other hand, now THAT is what will do it. That is the chip that will finally give AMD fans something to be excited about. They rehired Jim Keller, they realized many of the shortcomings of the architecture, and are finally implementing the changes needed to truly achieve what they wanted to achieve with the modular design in the first place. Some rumors state 15-20% improvement in IPC. Other's state 30%. I've even read 40% that someone said was leaked from an AMD engineer. Regardless or what it is, the fact that we can expect 15-40% improvement in IPC is finally something really look forward to. I couldn't care less about speeding up Piledriver. I want Steamroller.
Posted on Reply
#23
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: MLScrow
AMD would be making a big mistake releasing this chip. If they are going to make an enthusiast chip, they need to apply this to a Steamroller part, not Piledriver cores. We all know the performance of an 8350, we don't need one with a higher clock rate, what we need is a Steamroller FX chip. Chop chop!
Why they have the silicone its not exactly going to hurt profits to sell something they already have at a higher price.
Posted on Reply
#24
drdeathx
by: MLScrow
AMD would be making a big mistake releasing this chip. If they are going to make an enthusiast chip, they need to apply this to a Steamroller part, not Piledriver cores. We all know the performance of an 8350, we don't need one with a higher clock rate, what we need is a Steamroller FX chip. Chop chop!
Your missing the point. 2% of users know this but 98% don't. They will see a 5GHz core speed and buy a system or chip based upon this. This has nothing to do with your personal view and will add revenue for AMD. They are not making a mistake.:nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#25
MLScrow
by: drdeathx
Your missing the point. 2% of users know this but 98% don't. They will see a 5GHz core speed and buy a system or chip based upon this. This has nothing to do with your personal view and will add revenue for AMD. They are not making a mistake.:nutkick:
In terms of missing points...you do know that the general purpose of forum threads is to for people to hold conversations and discussion, which, if you weren't already aware, include personal views, right? :roll:

You also fail to realize your hypocrisy in that your belief that it "will" add revenue and that AMD is not making a mistake is also a personal one.

All I can say is that we should agree to disagree and since Steamroller is around the corner already, once the FX version is out and AMD posts their dismal sales numbers for 9000 series FX chips, I may or may not make fun of you. Only time will tell.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment