AMD Will Relaunch 5GHz FX-9590 Processor with Liquid Cooling

#4855058 Posted on: 06/24/2014 09:34 PM

---

If it's an H90 there will be no problem at all there.

I run one on my i7 3770k at 4.4ghz and I don't see it going past 65C stressed out.

It sits idle at 25-28C most of the time.

#4855236 Posted on: 06/24/2014 11:01 PM

---

I think what makes this worse is the fact they're repeating the same mistakes Intel made back when AMD dominated with the XP > A64 series of chips.

#4855248 Posted on: 06/24/2014 11:04 PM

---

Not really, they just are not turning the ship around as fast as we would like. This release is probably more likely being done to off load excess stock more than anything else. (Just a guess though, I have no proof of it.)

#4855332 Posted on: 06/24/2014 11:48 PM

---

They made a similar move awhile back with the original release of the 9590, it wasn't a particularly good idea then and it isn't now. As much as I'd love to see AMD doing something to turn things around, they're dragging their feet and have been for a long time now.

#4855464 Posted on: 06/25/2014 12:54 AM

---

Ramping up clockspeeds desperately? Say what you want, this is AMD's Netburst.

#4855471 Posted on: 06/25/2014 12:57 AM

---

We're a couple gens past that

#4855475 Posted on: 06/25/2014 12:58 AM

---

5ghz cpu loses to a stock 4770 4790 Then you can oc the intels. Total fail. Like the p4 netburst cpu losing to a much lower clocked amd. Begining to think amd will never catch up in my lifetime.

#4855484 Posted on: 06/25/2014 01:01 AM

---

Maybe AMD should just drop the FX line entirely and call it a day. Focus their resources on the APU and GPU departments instead. The APU is the one thing AMD still has on Intel.

#4855507 Posted on: 06/25/2014 01:12 AM

---

I agree if AMD could make a hex core APU then they might have something.

#4855519 Posted on: 06/25/2014 01:19 AM

---

It's hardly desperate. The problem with Bulldozer in general is that some design elements were poorly implemented for unknown reasons. Like the inclusion of shared FPU resources for one thing. If there were 8 FPU modules each linked to an integer core, with the only thing being shared were banks of L3, the chip would have easily given Intel a run for its money performance wise. Even though the power usage would have probably still been just as high. It at least would have been competitive. But I think they were banking too much on being able to achieve high frequency and perform well purely in integer based tasking.

Oh well, it's hard to get things exactly right when your company is as poorly manged as AMD has been. Not to mention their cash flow is obviously significantly restricted. Even then, having unlimited cash doesn't seem to be doing Intel many favors. They're still struggling for some reason to put out a competitive chip against ARM for phones and tablets.

#4855627 Posted on: 06/25/2014 02:21 AM

---

They are hardly dragging their feet. Seems to me folks have a selective memory on where things where just 2 years ago as compared to today. Things are slowly moving around towards the better. A straight up CPU is not as big a deal as it once was.

#4855633 Posted on: 06/25/2014 02:24 AM

---

Ok they launch a new box of the FX with liquid cooling.. well its a non news at best, they could have change the color of the box and thats it..

Then peoples start to speak about the fx lines ..

1month ago, AMD have shown their plan for the next 4years... They developp right now ARM 64bits for server where they expect to setup a new level of performance of ARM processors ( this time really designed from scratch to perform for HPC computing ( and not the classic ARM design ), they developp new Opteron lines, and new high performance desktop processors x86 who sould compleltey break with the bulldozer design.

With all the new technology developped by them in the aspect of high performance computing ( including stacked 3D rams ( who will be licenced and used by Nvidia for Pascal GPU's (SK Hinyx HBM), their developping on language for let work ARM + x86 inside the same system / OS / environnement ( allready shown by them ).. There's maybe better to speak about them than a new package for an old cpu. My I7 4930K was sold in a package with Intel Liquid cooler, and it was hopefull, because even at stock speed 130W is really high for the air cooler we find in cpu boxes.

No need to discuss for years because AMD release a new package for an old processor.

#4856009 Posted on: 06/25/2014 11:38 AM

---

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.

#4856019 Posted on: 06/25/2014 11:48 AM

---

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 would never buy AMD again, FX are really medicore. they only good at multi threaded but lack in all other front, that why Sandy bridge and afterwards(minus heat issues of Ivy+) are the perfect CPUS.

There is no area when intel cpus are weak, they destroy everything, and that is why i wouldn't recommend AMD to anyone at all... 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.

#4856058 Posted on: 06/25/2014 12:18 PM

---

$1000 for that pseudo oven? Ha, I'd consider it for $120 if the AMD motherboards are considerably cheaper than Intel ones. Wait, no I wouldn't, it probably loses out to my 1st gen i7 at 4GHz in real world scenarios where everything is dual and single threaded.