«

»

AMD FX-9590 AM3+ Processor Performance Review

PAGE INDEX

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

AMD FX-9590 AM3+ Conclusion

IMPORTANT: Although the rating and final score mentioned in this conclusion are made to be as objective as possible, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at various points in time. While we each do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that could render our rating obsolete. Please do not base any purchase solely on our conclusion, as it represents our product rating specifically for the product tested, which may differ from future versions. Benchmark Reviews begins our conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas that we rate.

AMD_FX_PIBAMD has long controlled the value portion of the sub-$200 processor market. Though the FX series is the latest iteration, the Phenom and Phenom-II processors before it also held down an excellent price to performance ratio, demonstrating the viability of AMD processors. The newest refresh of the FX series, the FX-8370E and FX-8370 CPUs show nothing different, especially in multi-threaded performance. The FX-9590 still sits at the top of it’s market, showing great performance beyond similarly priced processors. That being said, the FX-8370 does well competing with the FX-9590 and doesn’t cost as much.

The AMD FX-9590 didn’t overclock much for me. It ran at 5.0GHz on all cores, but that’s as high as I got it to go. Considering that 5.0GHz is the max turbo speed, I wasn’t really impressed. That was even running with a water cooler. I suppose that the FX-9590 is at the very top of the yields, so there probably isn’t much room for pushing the envelope. I’d have like to see something more, though.

The simply fact that AMD can continue to release new versions of the same CPUs with slightly higher clock speeds while lowering prices across the board is a testament to their high level of construction and the quality of materials used. The yields must continue to improve, because we are going on two years of Piledriver based FX chips at this point. The real question that this brings up, of course, is the value of the FX-9590 over the FX-8370. While the FX-9590 only has an MSRP $27 higher than the FX-8370, the two CPUs are very similar, and perform very closely. The FX-8370 may even have a little more headroom, meaning it might be able to overclock and perform just as well as the FX-9590

The FX series of processors represents a small part of the huge branding efforts of AMD. You can practically build an entire gaming PC out of parts from AMD or manufacturing partners. In our testbench, the Chipset on the motherboard is made by AMD, as is the CPU, the GPU, and the RAM. You can also get an AMD SSD to go along with the rest, leaving nothing but the PSU up to the another company. This is a testament of the functionality of the FX CPUs. AMD has the ability to fine tune performance together with every other component to ensure an excellent experience across the board. I’ve said the same about Samsung’s completely in-house manufactured SSDs recently. It is true for them, and it is true for AMD.

At the time of this publishing, the AMD FX-9590 processor is selling online for $234.99 (Amazon | B&H | Newegg). That’s actually closer to $50 or $55 more than the FX-8370. In this instance, I have to give the value to the FX-8370, and not so much to the FX-9590.

Pros:

+ 8 cores
+ Good Performance
+ Beats i5-4670 in most tests

Cons:

– The FX-8370 might be a better value
– Still using old cores

Ratings:

  • Performance: 8.50
  • Overclock: 7.00
  • Construction: 9.00
  • Functionality: 9.00
  • Value: 7.50

Final Score: 8.20 out of 10.


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>

*