i7 4770k vs AMD FX-9590

[MexicanAnimal]

Hi all, I was just about done with my mATX build, but then I came across the FX-9590. Here in Australia it has the exact same pricing than the i7, but the clock speed of the 9590 is intriguing.

 

I know that the AMD solution has a much higher TDP, but the power supply I was going for is more than enough. Another one of my issues is the MoBo, the one I was getting with the i7 was the Gryphon, but I don't know much about AMD's motherboards. 

 

Any insight would be much appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

 

[DoubleY]

What do you plan on doing with the computer that you will be building? 

[Kamina]

I'd go with the i7 4770k and overclock it. It'll have better overall performance, especially single core performance.

 

AMD FX 9590 uses AM3+ Socket, and the latest and best chipset is 990FX.

[MexicanAnimal]

What do you plane on doing with the computer that you will be building? 

 

I would be doing some gaming, not excessively heavy, but not excessively light, and also a lot of video editing and working with programs like after-effects, so I would enjoy a pretty beefy CPU.

 

I'd go with the i7 4770k and overclock it. It'll have better overall performance, especially single core performance.

 

AMD FX 9590 uses AM3+ Socket, and the latest and best chipset is 990FX.

 

Yeah, and I can't find many AM3+ mATX Motherboards, and I am getting a H100i, but still, that 5 GHz Turbo is pretty impressive. What's the most I can squeeze out of a 4770k with a H100i?

[JoshM]

Well if you are going MATX definitely go a 4770k as Z87 boards are better then a AM3+ in matx (they only have 760 chipset you want a 990fx chipset) If you go ATX then motherboards are more equal, but honestly get an FX8350 or FX9370 (only reason i got a 9370 was cause i got it cheaper then an 8350) and if you want those clock speed just OC the balls off it haha, the FX 9590 isn't worth it for the price as it is just an OCed 8350, if you go atx...

[DoubleY]

I would be doing some gaming, not excessively heavy, but not excessively light, and also a lot of video editing and working with programs like after-effects, so I would enjoy a pretty beefy CPU.

 

 

Yeah, and I can't find many AM3+ mATX Motherboards, and I am getting a H100i, but still, that 5 GHz Turbo is pretty impressive. What's the most I can squeeze out of a 4770k with a H100i?

Speed isn't everything my friend. The 4770K would still probably win in most situations, and has more advantages such as motherboard with PCI-E 3.0 where as the 990FX chipset STILL doesn't have PCI-E 3.0

[JAKEBAB]

4770k no question! clock speed doesnt make something better!

[MexicanAnimal]

Speed isn't everything my friend. The 4770K would still probably win in most situations, and has more advantages such as motherboard with PCI-E 3.0 where as the 990FX chipset STILL doesn't have PCI-E 3.0

 

4770k no question! clock speed doesnt make something better!

 

 

Well if you are going MATX definitely go a 4770k as Z87 boards are better then a AM3+ in matx (they only have 760 chipset you want a 990fx chipset) If you go ATX then motherboards are more equal, but honestly get an FX8350 or FX9370 (only reason i got a 9370 was cause i got it cheaper then an 8350) and if you want those clock speed just OC the balls off it haha, the FX 9590 isn't worth it for the price as it is just an OCed 8350, if you go atx...

 

Ok, thanks friends, I have decided to keep the 4770k + Gryphon build, thanks for the advice!

[Kuzma]

I'd go with the i7 4770k and overclock it. It'll have better overall performance, especially single core performance.

 

AMD FX 9590 uses AM3+ Socket, and the latest and best chipset is 990FX.

Multi-threaded the 9590 is very close to the Intel 6 cores which beat a 4770k pretty nicely. Tbh for future games the 9590>4770K.

[Priller]

Speed isn't everything my friend. The 4770K would still probably win in most situations, and has more advantages such as motherboard with PCI-E 3.0 where as the 990FX chipset STILL doesn't have PCI-E 3.0

 

lol

 

Haswell has 16 3.0 lanes while the FX series have 40 2.0 lanes.  You put two GPUs in and they will run both GPUs at the exact same speed while Haswell is maxed out. The old FX still has some PCI lanes left over.

 

Also, Asus does have PCI gen 3.0 on a 990FX board.

 

The fact that you have 2000+ posts is what worries me if you are spreading this nonsense around.

[JAKEBAB]

Multi-threaded the 9590 is very close to the Intel 6 cores which beat a 4770k pretty nicely. Tbh for future games the 9590>4770K.

seriously can u please give me a source to that because this is the second time ive seen u say this and i have not seen one things saying that the 9590 is anywhere close to a 4930k or even a 3930k for that matter and the 4770k beats it in basically everything from what i can see

[Kuzma]

seriously can u please give me a source to that because this is the second time ive seen u say this and i have not seen one things saying that the 9590 is anywhere close to a 4930k or even a 3930k for that matter and the 4770k beats it in basically everything from what i can see

I'm leaving for school in like a minute so I can't get any benchmarks up but look at all the benches from when the 9590 was first released, it had 3970X performance but with an equal price and crazy TDP so it wasn't worth it but for the price of a 4770K, if you don't care about TDP or Power it's a beast.

[JAKEBAB]

I'm leaving for school in like a minute so I can't get any benchmarks up but look at all the benches from when the 9590 was first released, it had 3970X performance but with an equal price and crazy TDP so it wasn't worth it but for the price of a 4770K, if you don't care about TDP or Power it's a beast.

are u talking about in just gaming performance or other applications too?

[Kuzma]

are u talking about in just gaming performance or other applications too?

I'm talking mulch-threaded performance which in current and future games = game performance.

 

Quick Google - http://i.imgur.com/XlFcqy4.jpg twas cinebench and not exactly the same but the 3960X outperformed it by about 10%.

[dizmo]

@Priller @Kuzma right now, for most games the 4770k will prove to be faster. It's also faster in a lot of daily tasks, or within a very close margin...while using 1.5x less wattage.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz.html

Wish it would have some BF4 bench's but it doesn't.

 

I wouldn't even bother using one of these chips in an mATX form factor build, especially since there aren't any good mATX 990FX boards.

[Grave]

There's like 10 reasons why you shouldn't get the 9590, most of which involve issues with cooling but that's usually only the case if you plan on a 4.9-5ghz stable overclock. I have no idea how often people run into problems with it at 100% load and your average cooler. I know that pretty much anyone I've seen with one uses a custom loop in their rig, among other mods to help with temperatures. I wouldn't say it's a dumb CPU, it's just kind of the beast that cannot be tamed right now (in comparison to other CPUs).

Realistically speaking, I think the 9590 is way more worth it dollar for dollar than the 4770k in many, many things (possibly just faster overall, I don't know for sure). But yeah, it has complications and I don't recommend trying to pick it up without investing some time, effort and money into a proper cooling solution for it. This is why I've decided to hold off on buying one, but I definitely want one still..

[Priller]

@Priller @Kuzma right now, for most games the 4770k will prove to be faster. It's also faster in a lot of daily tasks, or within a very close margin...while using 1.5x less wattage.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz.html

Wish it would have some BF4 bench's but it doesn't.

 

I wouldn't even bother using one of these chips in an mATX form factor build, especially since there aren't any good mATX 990FX boards.

 

Not sure why you mentioned me since I was talking about PCI-E lanes and didnt mention games.

 

Also you are comparing a CPU that has been around for a while to Intel's lastest and greatest CPU that they drop once a year.

 

It's impressive that AMD's 32nm CPUs have stayed in the arguement this long. Yet Intel is so much better(according to this forum).

 

And you say the Haswell will use 1.5X less wattage and yet the AMD CPUs still run cooler.......

[dizmo]

Not sure why you mentioned me since I was talking about PCI-E lanes and didnt mention games.

 

Also you are comparing a CPU that has been around for a while to Intel's lastest and greatest CPU that they drop once a year.

 

It's impressive that AMD's 32nm CPUs have stayed in the arguement this long. Yet Intel is so much better(according to this forum).

 

And you say the Haswell will use 1.5X less wattage and yet the AMD CPUs still run cooler.......

Gaming performance was the issue. It only affects it if he were to run SLI, which he's not.

I'm comparing what the OP is deciding against. You know, what actually makes sense and is helpful. Don't be butt hurt.

Runs cooler? Funny, they say this right in the review.

 

The FX-9590 is a hot running processor and we don’t mean hot in any conventional meaning of the word either. This thing is like having a miniature nuclear reactor strapped to your motherboard; it will thoroughly overwhelm mid-tier heatsinks and AIO water coolers alike.

[Priller]

Gaming performance was the issue. It only affects it if he were to run SLI, which he's not.

I'm comparing what the OP is deciding against. You know, what actually makes sense and is helpful. Don't be butt hurt.

Runs cooler? Funny, they say this right in the review.

Im not butt hurt. You think I was talking about gaming which I was not. I was responding to someone else about PCI-E lanes.

 

Of course they would say that. Why would they say that yet the Haswell run 80+C on the stock cooler and they dont mention it at all? Oh wait, it's supposed to run that way? It's still silicon.

[JAKEBAB]

Im not butt hurt. You think I was talking about gaming which I was not. I was responding to someone else about PCI-E lanes.

 

Of course they would say that. Why would they say that yet the Haswell run 80+C on the stock cooler and they dont mention it at all? Oh wait, it's supposed to run that way? It's still silicon.

haswell runs at 80+C on the stock cooler? please show me where u found this because i have never seen it.

 

edit: also amd is struggling with intels mainstream components with there own enthusiast components they dont even come close to intel enthusiasts chips this is fact not fanboyism the fact i have an intel cpu doesnt mean anything my first computer i built had an amd 955 in it i just get whatever fits my budget that has the most performance and in this case it was intel.

[dizmo]

Im not butt hurt. You think I was talking about gaming which I was not. I was responding to someone else about PCI-E lanes.

 

Of course they would say that. Why would they say that yet the Haswell run 80+C on the stock cooler and they dont mention it at all? Oh wait, it's supposed to run that way? It's still silicon.

Haha, your post definitely had a hurt tone to it.

Anyway, that's neither here nor there.

A better chip to compare the 9590 to would be a 4820k, which is actually cheaper than the 4770k (or should be).

The PCIe lanes, to be honest, don't even matter. 16x vs 8x is such a minimal improvement it's not even worth considering. The cards can't make use of the extra speed.

I also don't have any idea why you correlate post count to intelligence. The two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

[Priller]

haswell runs at 80+C on the stock cooler? please show me where u found this because i have never seen it.

 

edit: also amd is struggling with intels mainstream components with there own enthusiast components they dont even come close to intel enthusiasts chips this is fact not fanboyism the fact i have an intel cpu doesnt mean anything my first computer i built had an amd 955 in it i just get whatever fits my budget that has the most performance and in this case it was intel.

 

You dont look very hard do you?

 

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1214821

 

I can find other posts of actual users that have issues at stock speeds.

 

Haha, your post definitely had a hurt tone to it.

Anyway, that's neither here nor there.

A better chip to compare the 9590 to would be a 4820k, which is actually cheaper than the 4770k (or should be).

The PCIe lanes, to be honest, don't even matter. 16x vs 8x is such a minimal improvement it's not even worth considering. The cards can't make use of the extra speed.

I also don't have any idea why you correlate post count to intelligence. The two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

 

You have no idea what type of "Tone" I have since this is in written form. You instead imply one in your head because you dont know any better and you have no idea how I take things.

 

I pointed out something about PCI-E lanes to one individual and YOU decided to mention me for no apparent reason. Probably because you misread and jumped to conclusions on what you thought I said or what you think I meant instead of taking it at face value.

[JAKEBAB]

You dont look very hard do you?

 

http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1214821

 

I can find other posts of actual users that have issues at stock speeds.

 

there in extremely unrealistic loads and thats silverlight hammering all the cores id like to see what the 9590 would be with amds loud ass stock cooler and it being hammered!! this is not valid at all!

[Kuzma]

there in extremely unrealistic loads and thats silverlight hammering all the cores id like to see what the 9590 would be with amds loud ass stock cooler and it being hammered!! this is not valid at all!

AMD's "loud ass" stock cooler outperforms the Intel stock cooler easily so yeah, I'm interested to see how the 9590 does with it tbh.

[pummetje]

4770K by by far newer platform and energy efficient