Preview: AMD's FX-9590 Eight-Core At Up To 5.0GHz On Linux
Phoronix: Preview: AMD's FX-9590 Eight-Core At Up To 5.0GHz On Linux
Since last year AMD's had the FX-9590 as the top-end Vishera CPU that can top out at 5.0GHz with its Turbo Frequency, but initially this processor was only available to OEM system builds. Over time the OEM version of the FX-9590 became available to consumers while earlier this summer AMD launched a retail version of the FX-9590 that included the eight-core CPU with a closed-loop water cooling solution. Today we're reviewing this highest-end Vishera CPU to see how it compares to other AMD and Intel processors on Ubuntu Linux.
This really underlines the sad state of affairs of AMD's high-end desktop offerings, not that we haven't known this for years. The chip runs at a mind-boggling 220W TDP, runs so hot that it requires liquid cooling, and still can't compete with 84W TDP i7s. Bulldozer really is just a complete and utter disaster of an architecture, at least as far as desktop is concerned, maybe even worse than the original Phenom. It sucks because we desperately need Team Green to get its **** together. We've seen how Intel's desktop offerings have stagnated, offering minimal IPC gains from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge to Haswell. Intel can afford to sit on their hands and concentrate fully on lowering power consumption as they desperately try to push into the ARM-dominated mobile space because they simply have no competition in mid to high end desktops. They are competing against themselves in that space.
Last edited by sirdilznik; 09-01-2014 at 11:57 AM.
Wanna hear the punchline?
I'm still going to buy this monster.
You made me do this Intel, after your fucked up Atoms (I bought C-350 instead) and after unveiling your evil "solder everything" policy I have no other choice...
To me, the difference between "socketed, but a new socket each year" and "everything soldered" is not that big ...
Originally Posted by Redi44
to much, 220w is to much and performance to low, amd pls give up from this architecture, in some tests is worst than pentium g
Wow... That 9590 sucked... A10-7800K is good enough for me...
Sure thing but AMD is veeeery far away from "socketed, but a new socket each year" so kudos to them.
Originally Posted by CrystalGamma
Sad but true
ATM AMD is not able make decent high-end hardware.
Their niche now is low-end budget desktops.
It's sad because Intel has no competition on the "serious" market.
I always bought AMD cpus, my first cpu bought with my own money was an AMD K6-2@350MHz , but about a year ago I switched to Intel,
got myself an i7-4770k and I'm very happy with it.
I had an AMD A10-5800K before that and the difference is simply overwhelming.
I somehow tought some of those new FX are tested . Ah those will be announced tomorrow FX-8320E, FX-8370 and FX-8370E.
And Radeon 285 i think Tonga.
eidt: and Athlons X2 450, Athlon X4 840 and Athlon X4 860K Those are like Kaveri APU without Kaveri for the half price i think
Last edited by dungeon; 09-01-2014 at 01:03 PM.
Yeah, keeping the same socket while upgrading the cpu is a very cool feature from AMD.
Originally Posted by Redi44
But considering the performance and power draw, it's hardly worth it. Honestly, (and VERY VERY unfortunately), AMD is only worth it on the very low end. If you can afford at least an i3 and the motherboard to host it, do it. You'll get better performance and better performance per watt.
Since my first computer I always went Intel (486) -> AMD (486DX4) -> Intel (Pentium 166) -> AMD (K6-2 350) -> Intel (P3 733) -> AMD (AthlonXP 2500+D) -> Intel (PentiumDC 2GHz) -> ... still going for 6 years now. C'mon AMD, still waiting for that comeback.