Sunday, July 7th 2013

AMD FX-9590 5 GHz Processor Benchmarks Surface, Great Performance At A Price

Eagerly waiting to see how the so-called 5 GHz processor from camp AMD performs in the real world? Well, some lucky user over at VR-Zone forums got a chance to get this hands dirty with the yet-to-be on sale AMD FX-9590 processor, and decided to post his benchmark scores with all of us (much to our joy).

While the performance of AMD's fastest and hottest babe till date is no-doubt good, it comes at the price of an exorbitantly high 220W TDP, and of course a near $1000 price tag (if reports turn out to be 100% true). The CPU vCore is running at a high 1.5v, but then again we've always seen AMD chips operate at higher voltages than their Intel counterparts. No doubt, despite all this, system builders are going to have a gala time going ape over the 5 GHz FX-9590.



More results follow.

Source: VR-Zone Forums
Add your own comment

258 Comments on AMD FX-9590 5 GHz Processor Benchmarks Surface, Great Performance At A Price

#1
xorbe
by: cdawall
Lol google risc and cisc.
I meant for the guy I quoted, not me. Today's cisc chips are risc past the decoder and sequencer.
Posted on Reply
#2
fullinfusion
1.21 Gigawatts
So anybody know what the stock cpu voltage is going to be?
Posted on Reply
#3
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
They do exist ;)

by: cdawall




My FX showed up back home ;) (along with a new chip for my laptop)
Posted on Reply
#4
eidairaman1
by: cdawall
They do exist ;)
whats the chip with the TIM on it?
Posted on Reply
#5
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: eidairaman1
whats the chip with the TIM on it?
One for my netbook just an old TK42. Poor old LT3103u is getting a higher watt chip stuffed in it.
Posted on Reply
#6
eidairaman1
by: cdawall
One for my netbook just an old TK42. Poor old LT3103u is getting a higher watt chip stuffed in it.
ok i dunno what model and make of that chip- Athlon, Turion, Phenom, Sempron?
Posted on Reply
#7
mastrdrver
by: fullinfusion
So anybody know what the stock cpu voltage is going to be?
There's a photo I saw floating around showing 1.5v under load for the cores.
Posted on Reply
#8
eidairaman1
by: mastrdrver
There's a photo I saw floating around showing 1.5v under load for the cores.
yup just like the ol Athlon XP 3200+ ran
Posted on Reply
#9
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: eidairaman1
ok i dunno what model and make of that chip- Athlon, Turion, Phenom, Sempron?
Athlon X2 (mobile) it's a low watt chip to replace my Athlon X2 L310 which replaced the Athlon L110 that was in my netbook originally.

TK-42, L310, L110

by: mastrdrver
There's a photo I saw floating around showing 1.5v under load for the cores.
He had turbo turned off and the frequency hard set to 5ghz I wouldn't be suprised if the real CPU is different.
Posted on Reply
#10
eidairaman1
by: cdawall
Athlon X2 (mobile) it's a low watt chip to replace my Athlon X2 L310 which replaced the Athlon L110 that was in my netbook originally.

TK-42, L310, L110




He had turbo turned off and the frequency hard set to 5ghz I wouldn't be suprised if the real CPU is different.
thx for the clarification- must be a better chip overall for that laptop
Posted on Reply
#11
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: eidairaman1
thx for the clarification- must be a better chip overall for that laptop
It's not a terrible $30 upgrade :p Only thing I wish I could swap was the X1270 onboard for an HD3200 :toast:
Posted on Reply
#12
fullinfusion
1.21 Gigawatts
by: mastrdrver
There's a photo I saw floating around showing 1.5v under load for the cores.
Thats what I expected. When I had my FX8150 it took 1.5v to get 5ghz

Wow, so that's all this over priced cpu is :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#13
mastrdrver
Oh, I guess it was the pics in this thread that I was talking about. :laugh:

Is it on the VR-Zone forum that the person said they disabled turbo?

by: fullinfusion
Thats what I expected. When I had my FX8150 it took 1.5v to get 5ghz

Wow, so that's all this over priced cpu is :wtf:
Actually, it's just a new bin that is still with in AMD spec which could be different depending on how much your FX took to be stable. Even then, even an overclocked CPU may not pass certain tests as the P3 1.16Ghz did for Tom's and [H] back in the day.
Posted on Reply
#15
cadaveca
My name is Dave
by: m1ch
guess reviews are coming soon
AMD didn't contact me this time about doing the review, which was rather surprising considering our large AMD user base, but I have heard from a few reviewers I talk to that they have chips already, so I expect reviews soon myself. I have a board sitting here waiting for this chip's review, even. Will have to send an email!

My 8350 did 5 GHz, too, would be quite interesting to compare differences.
Posted on Reply
#16
refillable
I would buy it if it is $250 :). I have a 8120, I'm upgrading to a 8350 and OC it to 5GHz with Noctua D14 if this isn't $250...
Posted on Reply
#18
d1nky
LOL i know of 8350s that are nearly scoring 10k physics in 3d11. in firestrike physics i can hit 10,300.

i want mine to hit 9.5k today 3d11 physics


just an oc'd version it looks like. 9590 at 5ghz for £700...... or i could go through a few 8350s lol

unless someone overclocks this to 6.2ghz on water or they reach 9+ ghz on dice/ln2, what a waste

to quote: Kitguru says: An interesting release from AMD to target system builders, but we can’t help but feel it is a little like bringing a knife to a gunfight.
Posted on Reply
#19
Dent1
by: d1nky
to quote: Kitguru says: An interesting release from AMD to target system builders, but we can’t help but feel it is a little like bringing a knife to a gunfight.
This isn't for typical system builders.

It's for people whom are trying to break records and people whom want memorabilia of having a limited edition CPU for sentimental reasons or for financial appreciation to resell.
Posted on Reply
#20
oNyX
Why would AMD launch a 5GHz FX-8350 and re-brand it as a FX-9590? They must've done some incremental revision of architecture. Kinda like the FX6100 and FX-6200. Besides, I honestly don't care if a 4770K is 5.5% faster, AMD couldn't look any better. :rockout::rockout:
Posted on Reply
#23
BigMack70
So this CPU is even more fail than it looked like on paper. Doesn't overclock hardly at all on air, can't keep up with stock Haswell i7s in gaming, and at its very *best* keeps up with stock SB-E chips from Intel in a couple synthetics.

This chip is so bad it makes Bulldozer look like God's gift to CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#24
d1nky
im seeing mixed reviews on this chip, some can get 5ghz stable with little extra volts and some need loads more and still cant get stable.

obviously its an highly binned 8350, but a lil more refined. but i get the feeling motherboards cant handle it, as to make reviews so diverse.

worth the cash NO, unless someone breaks 10ghz on extreme cooling.
Posted on Reply
#25
Johan45
Check out this review at kitguru http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/amd-fx9590-5ghz-review-w-gigabyte-990fxa-ud5/18/. The benchmarks are still lame but the gaming tests are a little more realistic. If someone is spending that kind of cash they certainly won't be gaming at 1080. In these titles the FX9590 goes frame for frame with the i7 3960x OC'd to 4.4. That alone is pretty impressive.
AMD still has a long way to go to compete in the intel arena but strictly gaming the 9590 does quite well.
Sorry for the link but every time I tried to insert it properly the page would error.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment