AMD unleashes first ever commercial “5GHz” CPU, the FX-9590

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,948
1,534
136
Most likely 140W. I think the 220W figure floating around was total system power consumption. Are there any benchmarks or reviews around of a lesser model with the same core/arch overclocked to 5GHz which should hold reasonably true for these paper parts??

I was thinking this also but then I saw some quoted numbers for a 8350 at 5 Ghz and that was pulling around 200 or just over so it seems about right to me. We will still have to wait for an official review though
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
I'm glad they're releasing these! If the price is right, I'd buy one.

The link in the OP says the price is $800 for the 9590 and $400 for the 9370

I certainly would not pay that, and I doubt there are very many people who would.
 

Zucker2k

Golden Member
Feb 15, 2006
1,810
1,159
136
Rory Read must have been high as a mofo the day he signed these into existence. However, to charge $800 for this piece of hotpile is just insane!
 

Centauri

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2002
1,631
56
91
Why is it insane? It's a product that will have required minimal engineering effort to bring to market, and however many/few of these AMD does wind up selling will have enormous profit margins for the company.
 

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
Why is it insane? It's a product that will have required minimal engineering effort to bring to market, and however many/few of these AMD does wind up selling will have enormous profit margins for the company.

Will they? OEMs will have to design MB specific for them, and surely they won't bear the risk alone. And cooling. This processor will require some kind of non-standard cooling, which is rather expensive.
 

Centauri

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2002
1,631
56
91
Will they? OEMs will have to design MB specific for them, and surely they won't bear the risk alone. And cooling. This processor will require some kind of non-standard cooling, which is rather expensive.

What of that has to do with AMD's margins on an $800 CPU that is based off of a $200 CPU? :confused:
 

Centauri

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2002
1,631
56
91
Anyways, I suspect from AMD's 9xxx monikers for these CPUs that Steamroller will bring a new naming convention, because they just tossed the current one up in the air.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
It makes sense that a motherboard should be able to supply this kind of power, because this is exactly how much power a real APU should draw. Too bad the sockets arent the same... they really should all be FM2 at this point.
 

LogOver

Member
May 29, 2011
198
0
0
Just checked some reviews, and I can actually believe in 220W TDP figures

51144.png


Also no way it can be faster than even cheaper i7-3930K

51145.png
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,884
4,691
136
Way to go and pick one benchmark. How about you take all charts and multiply the times (if time is measured) by ~0.84x and points (if "points" are measured) by 1.18x. Then you will see how it will perform at 4.7/5Ghz clock and that it WILL beat 3770K in many workloads.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
I like it. Could AMD be growing a pair? Go for the performance, TDP be damned.

Even at 5Ghz it would lack badly behind in almost every game.

Its more likely a PR disaster ahead. The term that there is no bad PR will come to a trial.
 

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
What of that has to do with AMD's margins on an $800 CPU that is based off of a $200 CPU? :confused:

Who's going to pay $800 on an FX processor? Pricing should be way less than that if they want to move meaningful quantities of this SKU, because this price goes deep into LGA2011 territory, which offers far more performance than FX can muster for $594.

Pricing around $400 isn't too far fetched, but I assume they will have some kind of exotic cooling that will eat their margins.

Ed: Ok, [redacted], and a few others here would pay, but who else would?

No callouts
-ViRGE
 
Last edited by a moderator:

LogOver

Member
May 29, 2011
198
0
0

mrmt

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2012
3,974
0
76
Way to go and pick one benchmark. How about you take all charts and multiply the times (if time is measured) by ~0.84x and points (if "points" are measured) by 1.18x. Then you will see how it will perform at 4.7/5Ghz clock and that it WILL beat 3770K in many workloads.

Yes, and it will use 3-4 times more power.
 

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
21,034
3,516
126
Gogogo 200w tdp cpu monolith!!!
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,002
126
The link in the OP says the price is $800 for the 9590 and $400 for the 9370

I certainly would not pay that, and I doubt there are very many people who would.


Waaaaay too much money for these CPU's. I thought the 9590 would be an excellent chip... at $350. :)
 

dac7nco

Senior member
Jun 7, 2009
756
0
0
Way to go and pick one benchmark. How about you take all charts and multiply the times (if time is measured) by ~0.84x and points (if "points" are measured) by 1.18x. Then you will see how it will perform at 4.7/5Ghz clock and that it WILL beat 3770K in many workloads.

Now abwx needs to pipe in. An 8350 at truly insane clocks is, in fact, generally slower than a stock 3930K.
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
I can't blame AMD for bringing this chip to market. Power efficient? Of course not. Powerful? sure. At 4.7 stock and 5 Ghz OC'd it will beat a stock 3770k and perhaps a 4770k but mostlikely NOT a 3930k. The price at $800 is too high but people will probably pay it.
 
Last edited:

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,329
126
I guess AMD saw the temperature and power consumption on highly overclocked Haswell and felt they had to reclaim the high temperature and power consumption crowns :D
 

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,338
476
126
I guess AMD saw the temperature and power consumption on highly overclocked Haswell and felt they had to reclaim the high temperature and power consumption crowns :D
THAT is FUNNY! I nominate Grooveriding for best comment of the thread!:cool: