KitGuru tested the FX9590... it's pretty bad.

[ShintaiDK]

AMD makes the P4EE look good. This is the biggest turd of a CPU released sofar in history at its pricepoint.

Nobody with a right mind would buy this product.

 

[nemesismk2]

more like bringing an 8-bladed knife to a gun fight...

that is very funny

 

[laputan machine]

AMD really should have sold this one cheap, the loss they'd have by selling it at say $500 would be insignificant compared to the ad value and goodwill they'd gain. Or so I imagine anyway.

 

[mrmt]

But all the negativity is simply weird. I can understand people liking a product and becoming a fan of it, that psychology is reasonable to me, but I can't grasp the psychology of why someone would waste their time despising a product (unless it is particularly destructive of people, such as drugs, cigarettes or misused firearms).

Marketing.

CPU prices are so low because of Intel business model, a model tailored to yield record profits with low MSRP prices but despite of that Intel is still seen as a price gouger, or at least a company that charges more, When Intel prices a processor for $1000, nobody really complains because people expect this from Intel.

AMD, OTOH, is the value paladin. They converted a weakness, lower prices because nobody wants their products, into a strength among their fans in the tech community. And when the value paladin prices something for $1000, that's not expected because people look to AMD and think "value", not "premium prices". And when the value paladin prices something for $1000 without the correspondent performance to back the price up, and I think we can agree that FX 9570 can't match Intel cheaper offers, that ought to really piss off the people that bought their marketing message.

Something similar happened when AMD tried to change their price policy in the GPU market. Instead of matching Nvidia pricing with the 7000 series, they placed the SKUs above Nvidia price brackets. Despite being the fastest card, people looked at AMD line up and didn't see value there. As a result, AMD lost share in desktop GPUs.

 

[Zucker2k]

more like bringing an 8-bladed knife to a gun fight...

Very much on point; heavy, clumsy, and inefficient. Goodluck with that!

 

[frozentundra123456]

It was. The difference with the FX 9590 here was everybody was expecting an overpriced, power-guzzling turd and that's what they got.

Kitguru's benchmark suite is horrible btw. Gaming performance looks good vs the 4.8 GHz 3960X. If it wasn't for the ridiculous price it would probably have been well received in most sites.

Gaming performance is the worst part of the review. The tests all look gpu bound, so they tell you nothing except that they need to test with more cards at different resolutions.

 

[SiliconWars]

Something similar happened when AMD tried to change their price policy in the GPU market. Instead of matching Nvidia pricing with the 7000 series, they placed the SKUs above Nvidia price brackets. Despite being the fastest card, people looked at AMD line up and didn't see value there. As a result, AMD lost share in desktop GPUs.

That's one theory at least. Like many theories this one falls flat in the face of the facts, which any simple check before-hand would have shown.

In Q4 2011 (launch quarter of the 7970), AMD gained market share on Nvidia -

http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases...-10.4-over-last-quarter-and-increased-8.9-ov/

In Q1 2012, AMD's discrete desktop shipments were up by 4% -

http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases....8-over-last-quarter-slip-3.38-over-last-yea/

The company had a 4% increase in shipments of discrete GPUs over last quarter, and an 8% gain in notebook discrete GPUs

This is all happening at the same time your fantasy scenario of people running away from the "overpriced" 7970 was supposed to be occurring.

Even in Q2 2012, AMD was still increasing discrete desktop share -

http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases...sed-2.5-over-last-quarter-and-5.5-over-last-/

...and AMD saw gains in the discrete desktop category (2.5%).

You have to wait until Q3 2012 until Nvidia makes any gains (something to do with them having new cards vs AMD's 6-month old cards maybe?). Since that point, AMD has continued to gain more share. Even in Q1 this year the 7-series regained market share on Nvidia - http://jonpeddie.com/press-releases/details/add-in-board-market-up-in-q1-amd-gains-market-share/

AMD's overall graphics share fell apart at the end of 2012 because AMD massively cut down CPU production and mobile GPU attachment rates suffered badly because of it. Desktop share has remained strong.

This isn't the GPU forum. Please stick to CPU discussions and save these discussions for V&G
-ViRGE

 

[NTMBK]

more like bringing an 8-bladed knife to a gun fight...

Hey man, don't mess with those ninjas

 

[NTMBK]

AMD makes the P4EE look good. This is the biggest turd of a CPU released sofar in history at its pricepoint.

Nobody with a right mind would buy this product.

Yup- it's the pricepoint that really puts the final nail in it. If this was at the same price as a 4770k, it might be worth considering- in the UK I can get an 8350 at £150 and a 4770k at £270, so even that would be a steep markup. But where it is right now is just madness.

 

[Maximilian]

Why was there so much hype around this anyways??

We know an 8350/8320 is only good because its cheap, at 5ghz these things are a hog. What difference is a new model number and 5ghz by default gonna make? :|

Better binning isnt even worth considering IMO.

 

[NTMBK]

The most interesting part of the original article for me was that AMD aren't sending out review samples. Maybe that's their secret business plan? Convince all the tech sites to shell out for one for testing, make a quick $50k on some overclocked 8350s

 

[ShintaiDK]

The most interesting part of the original article for me was that AMD aren't sending out review samples. Maybe that's their secret business plan? Convince all the tech sites to shell out for one for testing, make a quick $50k on some overclocked 8350s

It seems like a product AMD dont want to sell, dont really want to show. It was all about a 5Ghz checkbox in the company CV.

100% PR. I am starting to doubt even 500 of these CPUs will ever exist. Almost no places sells it, and most that did now shows it as discontinued.

 

[monstercameron]

The most interesting part of the original article for me was that AMD aren't sending out review samples. Maybe that's their secret business plan? Convince all the tech sites to shell out for one for testing, make a quick $50k on some overclocked 8350s

THIS, amd paying all those sites back for giving scathing reviews, except phoronix ofcourse, that case would be them just being mean!:biggrin:

 

[AtenRa]

Where are the default frequency reviews ???

 

[Abwx]

Where are the default frequency reviews ???

This site is dishonnest...

The system is actually pretty quick in this benchmark, completing the encode in less than 9 minutes. It still can’t manage to match the fastest Intel Core i7 systems however.

 

[guskline]

Owning a 8350 OC'd to 4.6Ghz (21 x219) the results weren't surprising to me. I think a more worthy review would have been the 9590 vs the 4770k, stock and OC'd or the 9590 vs the 3960k stock and OC'd. If the price for the FX 9590 is $800 +, then a comparison with the above two chips shows the value.

I've said countless times on this forum that my 3770k, for most tests is faster than my 8350, stock or overclocked. HOWEVER, the difference in gameplay doesn't feel as noticeable. Most synthetic benchmark metrics favor Intel (i.e. power consumption, power per core etc.). That does not mean the Vishera is a "BAD" chip.

The problem with the FX 9590 is the price (problem for consumer not AMD). Let's faces it AMD got lots of PR from releasing this. Sure there was negativity but they already knew that! Bulldozer was the pinnacle of bad PR. Vishera shows improvement and this release shows that a few of these chips can be released at 4.7/5.0

My take? If you want AMD, buy a FX 8350 and OC it to 4.6-4.7 Ghz and be happy !

 

[Arachnotronic]

Kitguru's benchmark suite is horrible btw. Gaming performance looks good vs the 4.8 GHz 3960X. If it wasn't for the ridiculous price it would probably have been well received in most sites.

You mean the only thing that CPUs are used for is games?

 

[bononos]

There are more than just one variety of oranges as well.

The way you describe things you must not see any reason for the variety in cigars or top-shelf alcohol or various luxury brand vehicles.
......

As the price alone would seemingly make self-evident, the FX-9590 is clearly not priced for consideration by your typical mainstream "price/performance" budget conscious individual.
..........

Which is all right and fair. The problem is that AMDs very special edition for very special (aka rich) customers still perform slower than the stock Intel 4770 according to the review. Its like shelling out big bucks for bragging rights to still come out behind Intel's product.

If bragging rights were all the these special customers could expect to get, AMD should've charged more and made a product consisting of a gold plated cpu/mb/ram combo with embossed AMD seals and a special appreciation note thanking them for keeping a struggling underdog afloat.

 

[bononos]

Where are the default frequency reviews ???

It appears that the mb by default set the speed to 4.0 20x. Then they found out it wouldn't turbo and would throttle so they tweaked the settings to simulate always on turbo speed at 5Ghz which is fair.

 

[AtenRa]

It appears that the mb by default set the speed to 4.0 20x. Then they found out it wouldn't turbo and would throttle so they tweaked the settings to simulate always on turbo speed at 5Ghz which is fair.

If the motherboard was not working correctly they should have tried a different model. I want to see default frequency benchmarks for all the CPUs and then OC results, since this is a CPU review they should of benchmark more applications.

 

[sm625]

What I was thinking as I looked at those charts: "OMG make it stop... the pain, i cant stand the pain." This company is in serious need of a headstone.

 

[Zucker2k]

If the motherboard was not working correctly they should have tried a different model. I want to see default frequency benchmarks for all the CPUs and then OC results, since this is a CPU review they should of benchmark more applications.

Would you supply Lhe for the FX 9590 overclock? Thought so!

 

[Arachnotronic]

What I was thinking as I looked at those charts: "OMG make it stop... the pain, i cant stand the pain." This company is in serious need of a headstone.

What do you expect? Processors are getting harder and more expensive to design and validate, AMD is losing money and in the midst of trying to cut as much "fat" as it can, and it does all of this while on a significant process technology disadvantage against its main rival that prints money.

AMD's not dead, but it needs to get out of this particular ring. The focus on Jaguar is a good one, and I think against Atom in the higher volume PC space + eventually tablets (when Temash and its successors stop being vaporware), AMD can do quite well. It just needs to put a bullet through its money-losing, low volume high end CPU efforts quickly.

 

[cbrunny]

Well, that review was bad. Not talking specifically about the FX. I'm talking about the actual review itself. Quite incomplete and terribly written.

 

[AtenRa]

Would you supply Lhe for the FX 9590 overclock? Thought so!

Didnt get that, what do you mean??