AMD FX Series FX-9590 and FX-9370 are out!

[Iyarashii]

But.... who cares? The statement that "The 9590 is comparable to a 2 year old, 2 generation old CPU that nobody really uses anyway" is not very compelling.

The bottom line is that pretty much any -current gen- Intel solution, which are cheaper, are better. As far as I can tell, anyway. What niche is being filled here?

Exactly, I'm not saying that it's a good thing, in fact it's quite bad due to the 9590 losing in nearly every benchmark. I did find someone who got the chip to 5.4GHZ on a closed loop water cooler at 1.65V and RAM set to 2800MHz.

[chazus]

I'd want to see some solid benchmarking between a stock 5ghz 9590, and 3.8ghz 4770K, and overclocked on both.

Not that it matters. 400mhz extra on already meh performance is not worth $600.

[BicycleMafioso]

What are you talking about? You are approaching this the entirely wrong way, and I'm almost sure you're trying to instigate people rather than discuss.

2) Why are benchmarks being done against 3 generation old CPUs, and not... yanno. Ones we care about? >.>

One generation behind and I bet quite a lot more are sitting with i5 2500K than i5 4670K or even i5 3570K.

Maybe they didnt compare a 3770 or 4770 because then it would show that... I'm pretty sure AMD screwed the pooch.

How would they have possibly "screwed the pooch"? What were you expecting out of a higher binned CPU based on the same architecture? It's not supposed to do anything else? This is not a replacement model or something they expect people to rush out and upgrade to. It's just their higher tier premium product. Like has been happening for almost every generation of both companies.

It's still a Vishera, though.... So really all the 9370 is just a 8350 that's 400mhz more, and $100 more.

And what's up with the naming scheme? Why isn't it just 8570 (like it ought to be)? It doesn't have 9 cores.

I was hoping AMD would spur Intel into innovation. Instead, it sounds like all this has done is put AMD even further behind in the cpu race.

1) Yes. And it's supposed to be and they haven't ever claimed it to be different. And the 9370 is cherry-picked for its lower TDP, lower voltage requirement and general higher silicon.

2) Naming schemes are stupid on both side, and it's not "supposed" to be anything other than mean it's more exclusive and higher-tier.

3) It's not a replacement, and if you seriously expect this to put AMD behind rather than pushing them upwards, you're not seeing any kind of PR worth in this. AMD now has 5 GHz processors you can buy. Intel has a 4GHz processor at best, and for 300 USD more, with far more expensive motherboards. These are numbers that people will understand.

Where's what I don't understand.

FX-8350, Vishera, 4.0/4.2ghz, 32nm die, 125w TDP
FX-9370, Vishera, 4.4/4.6ghz, 32nm die, 220w TDP

If anything, I would say an 8350 would beat a 9370 when it comes to overclocking. The lower heat/TDP ought o let it hit 5ghz easier than a 9370.

All that means is that you don't understand TDP.

But.... who cares? The statement that "The 9590 is comparable to a 2 year old, 2 generation old CPU that nobody really uses anyway" is not very compelling.

The bottom line is that pretty much any -current gen- Intel solution, which are cheaper, are better. As far as I can tell, anyway. What niche is being filled here?

Didn't you say 2 generation old? It's one generation old, nevermind what Intel's PR machine is claiming. Their alleged "first generation" spanned four architectures.
And a lot of people, even a lot of people who are labelled enthusiasts who frequent this board uses it, so it's a rather moot point.

Possibly comparable to an i5 4570 and down. It's not meant to fill the role of competing against them in price/performance, if you want to play that game, the lower segmented AMD CPUs beat the Intel ones. As for niche: It's a PR and marketting CPU.



TL;DR: It's not supposed to be an intel-crushing behemoth. It's a PR-machine. It's all to be expected off of it. It will increase AMD sales because they are saying they have the fastest clocked CPU on the market. Which they do. Performance? Who cares.

[chazus]

One generation behind and I bet quite a lot more are sitting with i5 2500K than i5 4670K or even i5 3570K.

Thats true. I mean, everything aside, it would make sense to compare apples to apples (Rather, cores/threads). But we also know that, outside of say, BF3, benchmarks will likely remain the same betwee 2600K/2500K, 3770K/3570K, etc.

This is not a replacement model or something they expect people to rush out and upgrade to.

That's what AMD has been touting it to be, though. The 8300 replaced the 8100 series, and the 9xxx series was... supposed to replace that. At least, that's how they've marketed it.

AMD now has 5 GHz processors you can buy. Intel has a 4GHz processor at best, and for 300 USD more, with far more expensive motherboards. These are numbers that people will understand.

I... guess? I mean, anyone who isn't a person who walks into Best Buy and goes "I want a computer. Sell me something!" knows that the whole clock speed thing doesn't matter anymore. And hasn't for over half a decade.

All that means is that you don't understand TDP.

Yeaahhh I figured that as I was typing it >.>

Didn't you say 2 generation old?

Eh, I consider tick and tock two generations.

TL;DR: It's not supposed to be an intel-crushing behemoth. It's a PR-machine. It's all to be expected off of it. It will increase AMD sales because they are saying they have the fastest clocked CPU on the market. Which they do. Performance? Who cares.

I think an Intel Crushing behemoth is exactly what they've been spinning (And needing). With all the hype that's been backing it, it sounds to me like a PR nightmare, since the only thing they have to work with is "We have a higher number that is largely not important".

I apologize if I sound like I'm attempting to instigate. With all the hype AMD and people have been putting forward, I was hoping for something that might actually force some innovation. Intel is getting lazy, and I feel like this iteration is only going to make the CPU industry even lazier. I haven't really kept up to date, but -is- there a "8550" planned, at some point? Or is this the last update of AMD CPU's for another year, give or take?

[BicycleMafioso]

You'd be surprised at how little people who don't know everything about computers knows. I mean, really.
I have talked to people who've built their computers for years and still don't know jack.

Higher number matters in peoples minds. It does. It will not make them sell more 9590's (well, not a lost), but it will make them sell more AMD-things. Because people will know that they have the fastest clocked CPU.

As for 8550? I do not know the names, but Steamroller is in the pipeline. (And hopefully, with a shorter pipeline. Bad pun intended.)

[chazus]

I could be mistaken that the ratio of people who buy high end systems (Anything over $800) do some research >.> Maybe it's just wishful thinking.

[Cyanotical]

I could be mistaken that the ratio of people who buy high end systems (Anything over $800) do some research >.> Maybe it's just wishful thinking.

it's actually surprisingly high, there is a difference between people who build enthusiast rigs and hybrid workstation and the other probably 70% of people who own machines that cost more that $2000

if i quoted a build that included a 3970x, 4 titans, and 64GB of ram, a huge chunk of people assume that a build like that will get 500 fps in wow, simply because if it costs that much, it must get that kind of performance

now the question i have is where are you guys seeing that the 9590 is beating the 3960x? because i've looked at the links posted and the 9590 is nowhere near the 3960x (the 3dmark link didn't even have an amd chip on the page)

the reviews i've read show it at about 1/2 or less the performance of the 3930k/3960x which puts it on par with other quad core cpus, without the extra 2 cores, the 9590 is not ever going to beat a 3960x, unless of course you count the programs that have always been amd friendly, but who really measures cpu performance by how much faster you can zip a file

[chazus]

now the question i have is where are you guys seeing that the 9590 is beating the 3960x?

Uh. Actually... I just realized the links he gave saying the 9590 beat it... doesn't list the 9590. So I don't even know. This one says that most i7 IB/Haswells beat the 9590.

[Deleted]

AMD is beating a dead dog, that TDP is just insane. Already expensive CPU and you need a proper custom watercooling system to even hope to overclock it. Best air cooler will just about run it stock without throttling.

[Deleted]

You can use that as heating for your room in winter! (like i used to with my old 480GTX + Ci7 950).

[Faithh]

AMD is beating a dead dog, that TDP is just insane. Already expensive CPU and you need a proper custom watercooling system to even hope to overclock it. Best air cooler will just about run it stock without throttling.

I don't think you'll even come close considering a custom H2O loop for this chip due to the poor overclocking results and the stock voltage is like almost the max safe voltage so it'll be a very tiny overclock. In Prime95 this chip would pull alone 280-300W easily.

In my opinion this CPU is just literally money waste, sounds like a typical "Microsoft-action" step from AMD.

[Afrospinach]

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials/...roductId=56227

I noticed this only comes with a 1y warranty from them vs 3 years for the 8350. Anyone else think that is kind of ominous?

[Deleted]

In my opinion this CPU is just literally money waste, sounds like a typical "Microsoft-action" step from AMD.

I guess they are well aware they won't be selling many of them, just a way to flex muscle in desperate attempt to get attention to AMD processors in general.

[Deleted]

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials/...roductId=56227

I noticed this only comes with a 1y warranty from them vs 3 years for the 8350. Anyone else think that is kind of ominous?

From the site

Warranty Information:

Manufacturer amd
Warranty Type Direct with Manufacturer
Manufacturer Website http://www.amd.com
Manufacturer Phone 01276 932318
Warranty Period (yrs) 3

It still has a 3 year warranty.

This cpu is just a way from AMD to show what they can do with it. I think the conclusion from hardwarecanucks sums it up pretty good.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...r-5ghz-19.html

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

I... guess? I mean, anyone who isn't a person who walks into Best Buy and goes "I want a computer. Sell me something!" knows that the whole clock speed thing doesn't matter anymore. And hasn't for over half a decade.

The vast majority of people buying a new computer walk into bestbuy (other stores are available) and buy the PC that the guy in the shop points at.

Or is this the last update of AMD CPU's for another year, give or take?

http://www.techpowerup.com/187726/as...-fm2-apus.html

The A88XM-A with AMD A88X chipset and A55BM-A/USB3 with A55 chipset are both Micro-ATX motherboards for existing AMD 'Richland' and 'Trinity' FM2 APUs, and are hardware-ready for upcoming AMD 'Kaveri' FM2+ APUs that support DirectX 11.1 and PCI Express 3.0 natively. [...] The ASUS A88XM-A and A55BM-A/USB3 motherboards support Kaveri's new PCI Express 3.0 interface with a PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 slot

[Iyarashii]

I don't think you'll even come close considering a custom H2O loop for this chip due to the poor overclocking results and the stock voltage is like almost the max safe voltage so it'll be a very tiny overclock. In Prime95 this chip would pull alone 280-300W easily.

In my opinion this CPU is just literally money waste, sounds like a typical "Microsoft-action" step from AMD.

I feel as though that the chip has a huge potential, but only to those who are extreme enthusiasts. Like those that will use a waterbox to try and cool the processor. I've already seen people hitting 5.4GHz on 1.65V. Though the heat seems to be a big wall, especially with that TDP.

[Killora]

I feel as though that the chip has a huge potential, but only to those who are extreme enthusiasts. Like those that will use a waterbox to try and cool the processor. I've already seen people hitting 5.4GHz on 1.65V. Though the heat seems to be a big wall, especially with that TDP.

Potential for what? 1.65v isn't safe voltage at all. Running at that voltage 24/7 is likely to cause issues like electromigration or just flat out failure. 1.5v is on the edge of safe as is, 1.65v is not safe.

Heat has GOT to be out of control with this CPU. It requires a mega cooling solution to even run at stock, let alone at 1.65v, ignoring the fact that that voltage just isn't safe regardless of temperature. Overclocking headroom is going to be 100-200mhz at most.

So i'd still like to know what potential this CPU has over what an overclocked 8350 has? At least a 3930k/3960X has 2 extra cores (4 extra threads) over a standard i7. As well has a bigger L3 cache, and a lot of subtle performance increases on it's architecture.

[Iyarashii]

Potential for what? 1.65v isn't safe voltage at all. Running at that voltage 24/7 is likely to cause issues like electromigration or just flat out failure. 1.5v is on the edge of safe as is, 1.65v is not safe.

Heat has GOT to be out of control with this CPU. It requires a mega cooling solution to even run at stock, let alone at 1.65v, ignoring the fact that that voltage just isn't safe regardless of temperature. Overclocking headroom is going to be 100-200mhz at most.

So i'd still like to know what potential this CPU has over what an overclocked 8350 has? At least a 3930k/3960X has 2 extra cores (4 extra threads) over a standard i7. As well has a bigger L3 cache, and a lot of subtle performance increases on it's architecture.

Obviously that 1.65V is a lot more than what it should be running at, but the potential would be to just break records and benchmarks nothing more. The impracticability with the heat it puts out would make this a hit or miss for even running at 5GHz.


Also from what I've seen is that there is slightly better performance than a 8350 OC'd to 5GHz, but it's only around 3-4%

[Killora]

Obviously that 1.65V is a lot more than what it should be running at, but the potential would be to just break records and benchmarks nothing more. The impracticability with the heat it puts out would make this a hit or miss for even running at 5GHz.


Also from what I've seen is that there is slightly better performance than a 8350 OC'd to 5GHz, but it's only around 3-4%

Well, if you want to talk about breaking records, then i doubt it's going to do anything the 8350 hasn't done in that regard. Most of those people that break records with 8350s already have highly binned CPU's.

And benchmark breaking isn't synonymous with breaking overclock records, because those CPU's that are OC'd to 8ghz would crash in any program like that. benchmark breaking would require 100% stable overclock, which clock speed is already at the bleeding edge with this chip. And a 5ghz CPU isn't going to break any benchmark records, theres plenty of intel CPU's overclocked to 5ghz+ on the benchmark records.

[BicycleMafioso]

Uhhh. The TDP of this CPU is lower than the 8350 at equal clockspeeds, so it's not like it magically generates extra heat.
It probably is about equal to a 3960X at the same clockspeeds as well, which is rather impressive.