1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX-9590 - in FlanK3rs hands and in review

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by FlanK3r, Jul 17, 2013.

  1. FlanK3r

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    226 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    146
    Location:
    czech republic
    AMD FX-9590 ES review at PCTUNING (use translate from czech language to english). At the beginning I wanna tell two things.
    1) Intel CPUs has 1600 MHz DRAm as default IMC settigs, AMD 1866-2133, depends at model.
    2)Intel Z87/77 motherboards have set sometimes wrong Intel stock Turbo, so I set it right and manually at 39 (one)-38 (two)-38 (three)-37(for loading) for cores (3770k+4770k)

    http://pctuning.tyden.cz/hardware/p...rocesor-se-stava-realitou-amd-fx-9590?start=1

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    For graphs: "méně je lépe" = "lower value is better" "více je lépe" = "higher value is better"
     
    xvi, sttubs, Sempron Guy and 2 others say thanks.
  2. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,302 (1.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,526
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    Is there not something intrinsically wrong with that set up?

    The Haswell is teamed with a 7870 for all tests. But we get to see Vishera with a 7990. I appreciate it might be for demonstration of ability but it's not helpful to compare two cpu's when one is running AMD's 4th/5th most powerful gpu and the other is running with AMD's most powerful gpu.

    Unless i'm missing the point?
     
  3. PHaS3

    PHaS3

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    265 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    136
    I too would call foul, but all the tests shown are CPU only, not GPU...
     
  4. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    most of the other reviews ive seen have intel in favour.

    i hope discussion here will shed some light on this, or other reviews.

    different RAM speeds and timings on different platforms??
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2013
  5. RCoon

    RCoon Forum Gypsy

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    6,911 (7.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,166
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    The problem is, it might beat the intels in some of these tests AT STOCK, but this isnt going to overclock much more, whereas the intel has a buttload of overclocking headroom to go. Not to mention it consumes twice as much power.
    8350 was an awesome CPU, this thing is just a polished turd.
     
  6. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    reading that article and it says

    ''Disappointed by the inability to reach a 5 GHz on all cores I tried at least tests Superpi.''

    (and somethign about the motherboard may be to blame and temps)

    nothing more than cherry picked and overclocked 8350s

    ive seen 8350s do a lot better....
     
  7. FlanK3r

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    226 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    146
    Location:
    czech republic
    yes, because we talking about stock IMS settings. Haswell+IB has stock 1600 MHz IMC, Trinity, Vishera has 1866 MHz as CPU default IMC. Richland has 2133 MHz for A10. Sandy Bridge, Phenoms II exmaple have 1333 MHz...

    Of course, this CPU can run DRAM higher, but we "must" holt Intel and AMD specification. The same for Intel turbo. Motherboard vendors dont help with it. They have "edhance turbo spec", no Intel specification for turbo mode. This is 39-38-38-37 turbo multiplier for i7-4770K. But many motherboards was tested in reviews wrong with 39-39-39-39. Its "cheat" from my point of view.

    HD7990 vs HD7870.
    The PC demonstration was ES FX-9950 in full build PC system. I cant changed it. I wrote in text, we can not compare GPU results and power consumption of others PC. But I focused at CPU benchmarks and real aplications.
     
    d1nky, Melvis and HD64G say thanks.
  8. Vario

    Vario

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,909 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    913
    It looks to me that it is performing comparably, in benchmarks and that is better than previous fx series chips which is good news
     
  9. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    i see, well in that case most reviews are biased by using non stock settings. thanks.

    and what a shame about teh overclocking, will you be putting it on LN2/dice?
     
  10. FlanK3r

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    226 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    146
    Location:
    czech republic
    the second one, retail FX 9950, yes. But in August or so...
     
    xvi and d1nky say thanks.
  11. Johan45

    Johan45

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    Messages:
    816 (1.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    285
  12. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,662 (13.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,055
    cadaveca and xvi say thanks.
  13. xvi

    xvi

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,987 (0.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,158
    Location:
    Washington, US
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    You're looking at the 3960X? It seems that their comparisons were from tests a while ago and clock speeds vary. There are 3960X comparisons at 4.8, perhaps not for all though. Nice catch.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  14. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,943 (4.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,066
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Yeah, comparing 4.4 GHz 3960X and STOCK 9590 is...dumb. OC the 9590, too, thanks, bbqstew.:cry:
     
  15. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,543 (1.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    938
    Looking around at reviews this chip is not a golden clocker which means it's got nothing going for it over a 8350 or any other proc. It's only hope of holding off Intel and justifying the price was if it could hit like 5.8+ ghz on top end cooling. So I'm left wondering what the point is. It's not like they took any crowns back or tempted any buyers away from Intel ED chips.
     
  16. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    we'll have to see what it does on LN2 or dice i guess, maybe itll break a new record.

    if it doesnt, then i dont see the point in it.
     
  17. Xaser04

    Xaser04

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    740 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    106
    Why is the 4770K scoring 1,000 points lower in 3DMark11 than the 3770K?
     
  18. Melvis

    Melvis

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    3,581 (1.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    524
    Location:
    Australia
    Is this review done at its stock clocks of 4.7GHz all 8 cores with turbo set at 5GHz four cores?
     
  19. FlanK3r

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    226 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    146
    Location:
    czech republic
    yes, it is. 4.7 GHz and up to 5 GHz turbocore 3.0

    Xaser04: I dont know, maybe is the reason this. 90% of reviews in D-day reviewed Haswell and motherboards with non Intel turbo...With edhanced turbo. This mean, all stress time (no depends if 1 core or 8 logical cores) run at 3900 MHz. So +200 Mhz more than Intel Turbo specification. This gain can help in many hard load benchmarks. The second reason could be DRAM clock. Haswell scaling good with example 2400 MHz DDR3. But again, the default IMC in Intel spec is 1600 MHz without XMP.
     
    Melvis says thanks.
  20. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
  21. Xaser04

    Xaser04

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    740 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    106
    I might be miss-reading what you are saying here, but wouldn't this lead to a more favourable score for the 4770K?
     
  22. Johan45

    Johan45

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    Messages:
    816 (1.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    285
    This was from kitguru's review.
    "The system was prime stable at these settings and the core voltage showed 1.476V in the BIOS and around 1.49V in CPUz. The validation below shows 1.58 volts as we were pushing it harder to try further overclocking above 5ghz (unsuccessfully), but it was stable at 5ghz with 1.488v as shown in the CPUz screenshot below."

    They tried to push it but the cooling solution was inadequate. These chips clock higher with less volts the cooler you can manage to keep them The numbers I'm seeing look just like the FX8350 so in theory they've already been pushed. I highly doubt that any of these will go any higher than an 8350 would.
    Here's a good thread from OCF shows the OC'ing of an 8350 from 4.1 to 5.4. it was done for performance comparisons at clock speeds. Notice that at 5.0 the 835 was at 1.5v very similar ti the 9590. http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=724953
     
  23. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    8350 is a higher binned 8320... 9370...higher binned 8350...9590 higher binned 9370...

    and only some high end boards handle the TDP of a 5ghz 8350...
     
    RCoon says thanks.
  24. radrok

    radrok

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,989 (2.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    Location:
    Italy
    Can those CPUs take 1.6v-1.7v on water?

    For more than a benchmarking session, I mean.
     
  25. d1nky

    d1nky

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,707 (6.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,281
    Mine takes 1.6v all day long, when my ambients arent 35*c LOL
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page