«

»

AMD FX-9590 AM3+ Processor Performance Review

PAGE INDEX

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

PCMark 8 Benchmark

PCMark 8 is designed to be an extremely realistic benchmark that takes actual tasks that are commonly used in different environments and testing them, then compiling the results and assigning a score. During the PCMark 8 tests, worksheets and documents are opened, edited, and saved. Music and videos are played. Video conferencing is simulated. An internet browser is opened and runs through a series of pages and requests. The tests cover the gamut of tasks that are commonly associated with home use, work use, and creativity based usage.

FX_8370_PCMark_8One of the advantages that the AMD processors had in this particular test was their ability to use the R9-280X GPU and OpenCL to help out. This is, in part, the very beginnings of what AMD envisions in their heterogeneous compute future. Whether that is the sole reason that the AMD FX-8370 and FX-8370E outpace the i5-4670 in the home and creative suites is up for interpretation. Even with the OpenCL support, the i5 still pulls out a win in the work suite.


SKIP TO PAGE:

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

16 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. hans meiser

    “, the FX-9590 can’t keep up, or even come close, to the single core, hyper-threaded score of the i5-4670; even at 4.7GHz”

    The i5 4670 does not have hyper-threading.

    1. Amet

      AMD can´t beat Intel in 1-4 threads Benchs and applications, but using over 4 cores/threads, AMD can win, i always question why never uses the last estable AIDA64 to bench, looks like everybody wants Intel win, but, the reallity, if every application uses more than 4 threads efficiently an 8-Core FXs can be compared to i7 and 6-core FXs can be compared to i5, im waiting for 6-8-12 thread Direct X12 support, like Mantle you will see a good boost for 6-8 Core AMD Processors in graphics

      Happy Rest of Day

  2. EricE

    Single thread performance? I game and the vast majority of games performance hinges on single thread performance. Multi-CPU performanc is still, sadly, mostly relevant to benchmarks only 🙁

    Since I buy my PC’s to game i would really like to see single thread benchmarks included. Especially when overclocking, since with fewer cores fully engaged the CPUs should have more headroom for overclocking.

  3. ChrisC

    “…the i5 still pulls out a win in the work suite.”

    3193 > 3175. Are there other factors you’re considering or something?

    1. Wasp

      Reality apparently wasn’t considered. Maybe the Author could man up and make the correction, even if it does mean the “Intel” processor lost all three of those tests, lol :tear:

      1. Hank Tolman

        I meant that it beat the 8370 and 8370E, but it is definitely worded incorrectly. Thanks for the heads up.

        1. Evan

          You acknowledged that it was worded incorrectly, yet you still did not correct it…

  4. skmanu

    A couple of things to take into considerations:

    – The 9590 is a factory highly overclocked 8350/8370 and doesn’t have more than 5/10% OC headroom, unless you use some kind of exotic/expensive cooling. It would have been smarter to compare it to a 4670k at 4.4/4.5GHz.

    – when you buy a system, does only the CPU price count? Maybe you need to buy a motherboard, a psu, and a cooler… owners of 8 cores FX’s, like me, know what I am talking about… Sabertooth 990FX: $160. 750w quality PSU: $70. AIO LC: $100.

    The intel plaform now… Asrock pro3: $100. 600w quality PSU: $50. 212Evo: $30. One could build a 4790k platform for the same price as a FX 9590 one.

    I have both, and they both cost me the same.

    1. Itsthinking

      I’d rather have an 8350 and trade out that evo for a h100i, oh wait I did 😛 4.9ghz@ 1.23 volts =win (the evo did well but the temps weren’t nearly as good.

  5. Joseph

    AMD …as I have continue to state(TO…THEM..directly)—NEEDS to get a motherboard..out that supports DDR4—period! THIS….dogging around by them,is a major turn-off…to me. WHY—invest in “older” technology …that;in and of itself,makes absolutely no sense to me.

  6. Greg

    A year and a half later…FX-9590 ran at 4.7Ghz/5Ghz turbo for 3 months, underclocked at 4.5Ghz/4.7Ghz turbo for 12 months, and the last 3 months it’s been having issues to the point that it runs at 50C with four cores disabled and 11x multiplier (2200Hz). I’ve been through 1 Corsair h100i, three Antec Kuhler 1250’s, 7 types of thermal compounds, but I think it’s at the end of its life. I unfortunately downgraded to an FX-9370. I’m looking forward to a whole new motherboard, CPU, and DDR next time out.

  7. Will

    Am I going crazy or that whoever wrote this page kinda make a model number error/ misspelled a character.
    what it says : FX-9590 FD9590FHHKWOX 220W 8 4.7GHz/5.0GHz DDR3-2133 $290 -$86
    FX-9590 FD9590FHHKBOF 220W 8 4.7GHz/5.0GHz DDR3-2133 $226 -$86
    There is no model ending with “BOF” Its supposed to end in “WOF” that had me confused. The only difference between “WOX” and “WOF” is that WOX is the model with water cooling kit included in the box, that’s it. Or maybe he was trying to find the OEM/ Tray model number, it’s “FD9590FHW8KHK”.So can the editor/creator of this page fix that please.

    1. Olin Coles

      Oh no? Here’s the FD9590FHHKBOF sold online: http://amzn.to/1Jrv2dW

  8. kamal saini

    Fx 9590 never beat intel i7 soo

    1. Misha

      thats because the only i7s that can beat it are $200 more

  9. concepcion woods

    Timely discussion , I am thankful for the specifics – Does anyone know if my business can find a blank Alabama bit v form copy to edit ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

CAPTCHA

*