It depends what tests/benchmarks you consider. There are benchmarks where a 3960X barely beats a stock 8350, and others where the 8350 at stock destroy a 3960X. Imagine a 9590...
Are you serious? A 5GHz 8C PD barely matches/beats a stock clock i7 4770K. Both i7 3930K and i7 3960X would beat the FX9590 pretty much everywhere (at stock) and likely offer a lot more OCing headroom on air/water.
Both i7 3930K and i7 3960X would beat the FX9590 pretty much everywhere (at stock)
Are you reading the same review? The i7-4770k doesn't match or barely lose against the 9570- it doesn't even compete. Check page 16 onward, the 4770 might as well not exist.
TBH, seeing the $600 FX-9570 basically match the $1050 3960 was pretty damn impressive, IMO.
Chiropteran, if the VGA is already working at its maximum performance, adding more CPU performance is not going to help...
their gaming test is useless, you could add several slower CPUs with the same FPS.
You're basing these fairy tale comments on GPU bound results while ignoring the benchmarks that rely on CPU performance.
Then start posting up those benches to support your argument!
SPBHM, your complaint should be directed towards kitguru, not me. This thread is for discussing the kitguru review, and if those are the only real benchmarks they offer, they are the only data we have to go by.
Anything else is just speculation.
Good points, IDC, but imho manufacturers like Intel and AMD should not be encouraged to dabble in overclocking. Look at the specs of that system. All AMD did was raise the stock multiplier and voltage on a few select chips and spec'ed the rest of the components including cooling to handle the thermals. This is absolutely the wrong way for any manufacturer to do business. Enthusiasts are rightly frowning on this idea, lest it becomes popular in the near future. Hint, hint.
317 watts; and that price; for that effort!!?
OK, I'm not going to disagree with that because of course what you write is true.
But I just want to point out that it isn't like this is anything new either, GPU's are spec'ed, binned and priced with the same perspective in terms of performance, price/performance. total power consumption, performance/watt, etc.
In a lot of ways AMD is just doing more of the same.
I don't want people to think I am just arguing for the sake of arguing, or that I am just trying to play the devil's advocate here, because that isn't my motivation to post along the lines of what I have been posting.
I feel differently about the market justification for a boutique processor product like the FX-9590 and I don't feel it is reasonable (or worth one's personal time and effort) to attempt to assess and validate it on the basis of traditional purchase-decision metrics. To further explain what I mean lets take the example provided by the established after-market cooling industry.
This industry exists to offer end-users products that appeal to more than just the "does it provide the best cooling/buck performance?" consumer.
The available products range from everything including passive heatsinks to cheap active heatsinks (like the stock Intel HSF), to ~$100 heatsink w/heatpipes (like the NH-D14), to closed-loop water coolers (H80 an H100 tier products), to custom-assembled water loops which range upwards of $600 or more, to retail vaporphase cooling setups like my VapoLS.
Now to the everyday person who is just looking to get decent cooling at a decent price, noise isn't a big concern, high-OCs aren't a big concern, something even as mild as an $80 NH-D14 is going to be viewed as being silly expensive and entirely unnecessary. (let alone water cooling or vaporphase)
And yet we don't see a plethora of "NH-D14's are stupid products that deliver obnoxiously bad cooling/dollar results, this HSF should not even exist, Noctua needs a headstone and its management ought to be fired post-haste! tut tut my good man!" type threads.
Not even the extreme cooling like vaporphase (my vapoLS unit cost me a cool $1k ) garners much in terms of a "hate this" crowd.
These are products that are not made because they fit neatly into the existing hierarchy of continuously evolving and incrementally superior mainstream products. These are boutique freaks of technology that are solely created because there is a small niche of end-users for whom these kinds of "over the top" products appeal to.
How many people need or want a GTX Titan? Not many, not at its price point, but a few people do and thankfully they have access to it if they want it.
I'd never buy a GTX Titan, but I wouldn't begrudge someone who did, nor would I look down on Nvidia for making a product that targets and serves that niche demographic.
I can't say I'd never buy an FX-9590 (I did buy a QX6700 after all) but whether I buy one or not I am not about to castigate AMD for offering it.
And of course I'm not about to recommend anyone buy one if they are not an individual that is readily identifiable as fitting the target demographic. No more than I would recommend someone buy a $500 custom water loop when all they are really looking for is a 212+.
But I'm not gonna be haten on the custom water loop people either, what's the point in that?
oh great, you are blind to their CPU tests (http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/amd-fx9590-5ghz-review-w-gigabyte-990fxa-ud5/13/ http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/amd-fx9590-5ghz-review-w-gigabyte-990fxa-ud5/14/ http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/amd-fx9590-5ghz-review-w-gigabyte-990fxa-ud5/15/ but eager to accept their useless GPU bound
Since this is a processor, the only things that matter is price, performance and power consumption. That's it. And this product fails all three when compared to the competition.
I don't understand your reasoning and comments because your examples were the fastest product on that time. Titan was and still is the fastest single GPU. Noctua NH-D14 was and still is an excellent air cooler. Your 1k vapor cooler might have been expensive but it also granted you cooling better than air or water. Paying a premium for the best makes sense, many people won't buy it but at least there's a reason to buy it for those who do. This means the product has a reason to exist. When you say "And of course I'm not about to recommend anyone buy one if they are not an individual that is readily identifiable as fitting the target demographic" The only target happy to buy this would be ignorant people who haven't researched the performance of the product. When a product is released that obviously attempts to prey on the stupid, the people who know better SHOULD absolutely bash the hell out of that product.
The 9590 is not the best at anything so the price is not justified in most peoples eyes and this makes everyone laugh. This isn't something that you physically interact with like high dollar clothing or a luxury car where there are other perks or reasons to spend more on the product instead of just speed.
Since this is a processor, the only things that matter is price, performance and power consumption. That's it. And this product fails all three when compared to the competition.
OK, I'm not going to disagree with that because of course what you write is true.
But I just want to point out that it isn't like this is anything new either, GPU's are spec'ed, binned and priced with the same perspective in terms of performance, price/performance. total power consumption, performance/watt, etc.
In a lot of ways AMD is just doing more of the same.
I don't want people to think I am just arguing for the sake of arguing, or that I am just trying to play the devil's advocate here, because that isn't my motivation to post along the lines of what I have been posting.
I feel differently about the market justification for a boutique processor product like the FX-9590 and I don't feel it is reasonable (or worth one's personal time and effort) to attempt to assess and validate it on the basis of traditional purchase-decision metrics. To further explain what I mean lets take the example provided by the established after-market cooling industry.
This industry exists to offer end-users products that appeal to more than just the "does it provide the best cooling/buck performance?" consumer.
The available products range from everything including passive heatsinks to cheap active heatsinks (like the stock Intel HSF), to ~$100 heatsink w/heatpipes (like the NH-D14), to closed-loop water coolers (H80 an H100 tier products), to custom-assembled water loops which range upwards of $600 or more, to retail vaporphase cooling setups like my VapoLS.
Now to the everyday person who is just looking to get decent cooling at a decent price, noise isn't a big concern, high-OCs aren't a big concern, something even as mild as an $80 NH-D14 is going to be viewed as being silly expensive and entirely unnecessary. (let alone water cooling or vaporphase)
And yet we don't see a plethora of "NH-D14's are stupid products that deliver obnoxiously bad cooling/dollar results, this HSF should not even exist, Noctua needs a headstone and its management ought to be fired post-haste! tut tut my good man!" type threads.
Not even the extreme cooling like vaporphase (my vapoLS unit cost me a cool $1k ) garners much in terms of a "hate this" crowd.
These are products that are not made because they fit neatly into the existing hierarchy of continuously evolving and incrementally superior mainstream products. These are boutique freaks of technology that are solely created because there is a small niche of end-users for whom these kinds of "over the top" products appeal to.
How many people need or want a GTX Titan? Not many, not at its price point, but a few people do and thankfully they have access to it if they want it.
I'd never buy a GTX Titan, but I wouldn't begrudge someone who did, nor would I look down on Nvidia for making a product that targets and serves that niche demographic.
I can't say I'd never buy an FX-9590 (I did buy a QX6700 after all) but whether I buy one or not I am not about to castigate AMD for offering it.
And of course I'm not about to recommend anyone buy one if they are not an individual that is readily identifiable as fitting the target demographic. No more than I would recommend someone buy a $500 custom water loop when all they are really looking for is a 212+.
But I'm not gonna be haten on the custom water loop people either, what's the point in that?
we don't have to presume ignorance or mental handicap are the only legitimate reasons for a consumer to purchase an FX-9590, do we?
It is the fastest x86 CPU you can buy if you don't want to be an Intel customer for whatever reason.
I get that not everyone wants to be a Walmart customer, they'd rather shop at a family-owned store and support local and small businesses in and around their community.
The same with shopping at farmer's markets versus buying your groceries from a big-name chain grocery store.
This is what I mean when I say you can't just apply a "one size fits all" mentality to assessing this type of boutique product.
Some people think buying organic food is a waste of money, that it is a hype, others feel it provides a tangible improvement in the quality of the food.
We love free and open markets with competition because it gives us choices, the choice to choose what suits our own tastes and preferences.
AMD is simply providing yet another option. There are lots of reasons why someone might buy it, we don't have to presume ignorance or mental handicap are the only legitimate reasons for a consumer to purchase an FX-9590, do we?
maybe they just got used to the taste...I dont like pickels but others do...or something to that effect.Well to continue your analogy, I suppose company A could put out food that tasted worse and cost more, and some would choose to buy it for some emotional attachment to the company or dislike of company B, and that is their privilege, but it doesnt make sense to me.
AMD is simply providing yet another option. There are lots of reasons why someone might buy it, we don't have to presume ignorance or mental handicap are the only legitimate reasons for a consumer to purchase an FX-9590, do we?
Well to continue your analogy, I suppose company A could put out food that tasted worse and cost more, and some would choose to buy it for some emotional attachment to the company or dislike of company B, and that is their privilege, but it doesnt make sense to me.
I'd buy it as an upgrade, not because I love AMD, but because I wouldn't have to upgrade my mobo as well, and that is a big deal for me considering the state of my system with WC. Everything space-wise (3 video cards) works as is with my current motherboard and I'd hate to have to change it all out. If only replacing the CPU, it is a LOT easier for me, I would just have to pop off the CPU block.
Just giving a reason why someone WOULD buy it...I wouldn't actually do it due to the power consumption but you get the idea...I don't have to love AMD or hate Intel to buy this CPU, pretty much what IDC was getting at.
Well to continue your analogy, I suppose company A could put out food that tasted worse and cost more, and some would choose to buy it for some emotional attachment to the company or dislike of company B, and that is their privilege, but it doesnt make sense to me.
I suppose I said real benchmarks, I meant real-world. None of those are real world tests IMO. I'm sure someone will pop up here and explain that they encode videos every day for hours and hours, but for the majority of enthusiasts I'd bet that 3d modeling performance is about as important as the name of the guy who inspects socks.
And I find it funny how the story changes. When the FX-8150 bulldozer was released, it was pretty damn terrible, but it *did* perform well in 7-zip and some encoding. Of course the Intel fans pointed out that it was terrible for gaming and only gaming counts. Now that the situation is reversed, the gaming benchmarks don't count and only the encoding results count.
Yeah, okay.
At default speeds, the FX9590 is faster than Core i7 4770K in most of the applications and it can match or be faster than 6-core Core i7 3930K/3960X.