ASRock X670E Steel Legend review
Solidigm P44 Pro (1TB/2TB) M.2 NVMe SSD Review
EnGenius ECW336 WIFI6E Access Point review
MSI MEG Z790 ACE review
Deepcool LT720 LCS Cooler Review
Arctic A35/I35 A-RGB air coolers review
Minisforum HX90G (Ryzen 9 5900HX + RX 6600M) mini PC review
MSI MPG Z790 Edge (DDR4) review
MSI GeForce RTX 4080 Gaming X TRIO review
Deepcool CH510 chassis review
AMD Will Relaunch 5GHz FX-9590 Processor with Liquid Cooling
A day or two ago I showed your this twitter photo from AMD's vice president of channel sales Roy Taylor showed a photo of a box with a new FX processor. The SKU indicates that the CPU is paired with liquid cooling. It is now confirmed that the processors is not new, but in fact the 8-core AMD FX-9590 Flagship Piledriver Processor. The product will now be released in retail likely for a much better price and with liquid cooling.
The processor was the first to achieve the 5 GHz core frequency as a standard operating clock speed however was met with criticism due to a price of $999 US and a 220W TDP. The FX-9590 processor packs 8 cores and 8 threads with 8 MB of L3 cache, core clock of 4.7 GHz and boost clock of 5.0 GHz.
The highly (over) clocked FX-8350 Vishera-processor has a rather spicy 220W TDP is thus being re-launched, this time for the complete kit at At $360 USD.
| AMD FX-9590 | AMD FX-9370 | AMD FX-8350 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Piledriver | Piledriver | Piledriver |
| Family | Vishera | Vishera | Vishera |
| Manufacture | 32 nm SOI HKMG | 32 nm SOI HKMG | 32 nm SOI HKMG |
| Cores | 8 pcs. (4 pcs. Modules) | 8 pcs. (4 pcs. Modules) | 8 pcs. (4 pcs. Modules) |
| CPU Clock Base | 4.7 GHz | 4.4 Ghz | 4.0 GHz |
| CPU Turbo Core | 5.0 GHz | 4.7 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| L2 cache | 4 x 2 MB | 4 x 2 MB | 4 x 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 8 MB | 8 MB |
| Max. DDR3 | 1866 MHz | 1866 MHz | 1866 MHz |
| TDP | 220 W | 220 W | 125 W |
| Base | AM3 + | AM3 + | AM3 + |
AMD will show Temash-Based Prototypes at CES - 11/30/2012 08:41 AM
Chief executive officer of Advanced Micro Devices said that the first prototypes of products based on code-named Temash ultra low-power accelerated processing units will be demonstrated around the con...
CES: AMD will intro four new CPUs in Q1 - 01/05/2010 04:27 AM
AMD released a couple of details about the hardware it plans to release in early 2010. Of course on Intels Core i5 600 series launch date AMD talks about a 555 Black Edition CPU. AMD states that this ...
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 10237
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 10237
Joined: 2006-02-14
#4856138 Posted on: 06/25/2014 01:57 PM
You don't seem to understand how slow clock for clock these AMD CPUs are. They're slower than the old architecture they replaced. In single threaded applications they're a joke. A first gen i7 at 4GHz probably does beat it out in many single threaded programs and those chips were common in 2009.
And no, when AMD released the Phenoms they were slower than the Core 2s, a generation before the i7s. So if you consider "competing" as releasing a product much later than the opposition, then failing to compare to their offerings, then yes they did compete... and lost billions in the process. The same thing happened with the Phenom 2s.
ROFL i7 920 will be raped by 5ghz fx in just about everything, its about the same as phenom 2 970, you must have forgotten that back then amd was able to compete with there phenoms
You don't seem to understand how slow clock for clock these AMD CPUs are. They're slower than the old architecture they replaced. In single threaded applications they're a joke. A first gen i7 at 4GHz probably does beat it out in many single threaded programs and those chips were common in 2009.
And no, when AMD released the Phenoms they were slower than the Core 2s, a generation before the i7s. So if you consider "competing" as releasing a product much later than the opposition, then failing to compare to their offerings, then yes they did compete... and lost billions in the process. The same thing happened with the Phenom 2s.
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 4196
Joined: 2004-09-28
#4856154 Posted on: 06/25/2014 02:12 PM
On what planet would this happen? Intel clock speeds are faster than AMD clock speeds. Also the AMD 8 core is really a quad core with hyperthreading if I am not mistaken. Also the Core 2's helped Intel regain their top dog title against the phenoms.
ROFL i7 920 will be raped by 5ghz fx in just about everything, its about the same as phenom 2 970, you must have forgotten that back then amd was able to compete with there phenoms
On what planet would this happen? Intel clock speeds are faster than AMD clock speeds. Also the AMD 8 core is really a quad core with hyperthreading if I am not mistaken. Also the Core 2's helped Intel regain their top dog title against the phenoms.
kd7
Senior Member
Posts: 151
Joined: 2014-03-22
Senior Member
Posts: 151
Joined: 2014-03-22
#4856163 Posted on: 06/25/2014 02:18 PM
define best
UNLESS someone want super low weak budget cpu with nice APU, the only area where AMD are good is graphic, but even their they not the best but that out of this topic.
define best
ManofGod
Senior Member
Posts: 1575
Joined: 2004-12-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1575
Joined: 2004-12-10
#4856212 Posted on: 06/25/2014 03:02 PM
Care to remind me where they were two years ago? I seem to remember it being in a poor position compared to Intel when it came to single threaded performance. If you like you can go back a further two years before that? Same thing. Their solution to the problem was what exactly in the long term? Clinging to the same old socket and ramping up clock speeds on technology with poor single threaded performance and ever increasing power requirements.
Your response doesn't even make sense, a straight up CPU is not a big deal? For what exactly, gaming? That's not what's being discussed here, the performance of the CPU is being discussed. There are a ton of scenarios where the CPU is incredibly important, even in gaming. You can't excuse a poor showing from AMD in the CPU department by saying that the 'CPU doesn't matter'. It's the equivalent of saying a Ford Fiesta is just as good as a Lamborghini because you can't drive over 60mph anyway.
I realise you have AMD hardware, and that's fine. But while it isn't utterly terrible, it could be a lot better on the processor side. It doesn't matter how you try to skew peoples words, AMD haven't done anything particularly impressive for a long time in the CPU department. Neither have Intel for that matter, but they don't need to.
I did not say anything you said in the first 2/3rds of your post but and yes, you do seem to be exhibiting a selective memory here. Hummm, according to you, they only have the 990FX chipset and only a FX9590 and nothing else.
Also, they have some new stuff coming in 2015 or 2016 that is replacing their CMT architecture. However, they are no longer going to produce a CPU only chip ever again. (That is fine by me since they do not need to and the APU's are moving their way up.)
Edit: Oh, and it would be more like comparing a Mustang GT or Dodge Challenger SRT8 to a Lamborghini.
Oh well, it's hard to get things exactly right when your company is as poorly manged as AMD has been.
It would be more accurate to say as poorly managed as AMD used to be.
Care to remind me where they were two years ago? I seem to remember it being in a poor position compared to Intel when it came to single threaded performance. If you like you can go back a further two years before that? Same thing. Their solution to the problem was what exactly in the long term? Clinging to the same old socket and ramping up clock speeds on technology with poor single threaded performance and ever increasing power requirements.
Your response doesn't even make sense, a straight up CPU is not a big deal? For what exactly, gaming? That's not what's being discussed here, the performance of the CPU is being discussed. There are a ton of scenarios where the CPU is incredibly important, even in gaming. You can't excuse a poor showing from AMD in the CPU department by saying that the 'CPU doesn't matter'. It's the equivalent of saying a Ford Fiesta is just as good as a Lamborghini because you can't drive over 60mph anyway.
I realise you have AMD hardware, and that's fine. But while it isn't utterly terrible, it could be a lot better on the processor side. It doesn't matter how you try to skew peoples words, AMD haven't done anything particularly impressive for a long time in the CPU department. Neither have Intel for that matter, but they don't need to.
I did not say anything you said in the first 2/3rds of your post but and yes, you do seem to be exhibiting a selective memory here. Hummm, according to you, they only have the 990FX chipset and only a FX9590 and nothing else.
Also, they have some new stuff coming in 2015 or 2016 that is replacing their CMT architecture. However, they are no longer going to produce a CPU only chip ever again. (That is fine by me since they do not need to and the APU's are moving their way up.)
Edit: Oh, and it would be more like comparing a Mustang GT or Dodge Challenger SRT8 to a Lamborghini.
Oh well, it's hard to get things exactly right when your company is as poorly manged as AMD has been.
It would be more accurate to say as poorly managed as AMD used to be.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 292
Joined: 2013-08-16
ROFL i7 920 will be raped by 5ghz fx in just about everything, its about the same as phenom 2 970, you must have forgotten that back then amd was able to compete with there phenoms