FX 9590

[RJSX1]

so just get intel lol

[FilipSebik]

What dumbass would spend so much money on a phase cooler to cool an AMD...

because thats really cheap lmao

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/400W-Peltierelement-Peltier-Element-Cool-Heat-NEW-/151856088815?hash=item235b5406ef:g:UiQAAOSw1vlUrh-R

https://www.kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=490

Total: 200 Euros

Such expensive

[agent_x007]

...serious liquid cooling (Even air coolers of the largest sizes won't be able to keep up with the 220-watt TDP when you put it under load)

I think my air cooling setup, should be OK with 220W TDP  : LINK

It may be loud under load, but it should keep CPU cool (I'm assuming, that 6 "U" shaped heatpipes will cope with heat transfer fast enough).

[Belgarathian]

My friend has FX 9590 OCed to 5.5GHz and it mostly beats all newest i7 CPUs

 

5.5GHz.... My god. 

 

~400W TDP on a 360mm RAD? 

[Dabombinable]

5.5GHz.... My god. 

 

~400W TDP on a 360mm RAD? 

Exaggerating a bit, but its close to what my GTX 970 consumes under load.

[Glenwing]

Ladies and gentlemen, You've never heard of phase change w/ Peltier?

 

Better cooling doesn't reduce heat output

[FilipSebik]

Better cooling doesn't reduce heat output

But it makes it run cooler like he has -9`C on idle and 59`C on load

[Dabombinable]

But it makes it run cooler like he has -9`C on idle and 59`C on load

^misses the point

[FilipSebik]

^misses the point

I said that friend has OCed it to 5.5GHz and it beats most newest intel CPUs

[Dabombinable]

I said that friend has OCed it to 5.5GHz and it beats most newest intel CPUs

It beats none of the i7-fact.

[Jumper118]

I said that friend has OCed it to 5.5GHz and it beats most newest intel CPUs

what voltage is it at though? 

[Patrick Bateman]

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/400W-Peltierelement-Peltier-Element-Cool-Heat-NEW-/151856088815?hash=item235b5406ef:g:UiQAAOSw1vlUrh-R

https://www.kingpincooling.com/forum/showthread.php?t=490

Total: 200 Euros

Such expensive

ends up costing more than superior intel cpu.

[Prysin]

It's doable with a huge rad or dice. It's not a 24/7 overclock that's for sure.

sure it is... change the fans on your rad with a industrial leafblower... add another industrial leafblower to blow across the mobo.

aint no problem.

 

good peltor hearing protection is like 100 bucks.

[Prysin]

5.5GHz.... My god. 

 

~400W TDP on a 360mm RAD? 

the rad that comes with the R9 295x2 is a thick 120mm RAD.. its max Thermal dissipation is 550w....

 

a 360 mm RAD, given 20c ambient temp should be around 850-1000w max TDP (all fans at 100%)

[Prysin]

It beats none of the i7-fact.

should disable 4 ALUs and see how it stacks up against i5s....

[juretrn]

9590 is a gimmick CPU.

[Prysin]

9590 is a blazing ball of hellfire and misery

fix'd

[besmirch]

My friend has FX 9590 OCed to 5.5GHz and it mostly beats all newest i7 CPUs

 

Right.. "friend".

 

I have (not mine friend) FX 8350 OC to 4.72GHz on Air (I'm using is on daily basis). 9590 is the same chip but selected to reach higher frequency. It goes up to 5-5.1GHz for most of the users, where FX 8350 sweet spot is 4.7-4.8GHz.

 

 

Without OC, FX is more or less the same as i5 4xxx, in some games like i7 3xxx.

FX with OC 4.5+is like i7 3xxx-4xxx., but it depends on the game.

I'm new on this forum, but I know what I'm talking about. I can tell you even more:

- With 4 mem sticks on those FX'es you will be sucked with 1600Mhz RAM, CPU supports 1866MHz RAM only with 2 mem sticks. That's why I have ram @CL8

- With 4 mem sticks, you will have to put more volts on the CPU as you would need with 2 mem sticks.

- While doing OC on FX'es Enable: APM, Core C6, SVM, C&Q - it will be cooler

- if you won't disenable C1E Support CPU won't be stable at higher frequencies.

[Dabombinable]

should disable 4 ALUs and see how it stacks up against i5s....

At 5.3GHz it would just pull ahead of my 3.3GHz i5 4440 with 4 ALU disabled. While consuming well over 220W as opposed to the 30W or so that my i5 consumes.

 

 

Right.. "friend".

 

I have (not mine friend) FX 8350 OC to 4.72GHz on Air (I'm using is on daily basis). 9590 is the same chip but selected to reach higher frequency. It goes up to 5-5.1GHz for most of the users, where FX 8350 sweet spot is 4.7-4.8GHz.

 

 

 

Without OC, FX is more or less the same as i5 4xxx, in some games like i7 3xxx.

FX with OC 4.5+is like i7 3xxx-4xxx., but it depends on the game.

I'm new on this forum, but I know what I'm talking about. I can tell you even more:

- With 4 mem sticks on those FX'es you will be sucked with 1600Mhz RAM, CPU supports 1866MHz RAM only with 2 mem sticks. That's why I have ram @CL8

- With 4 mem sticks, you will have to put more volts on the CPU as you would need with 2 mem sticks.

- While doing OC on FX'es Enable: APM, Core C6, SVM, C&Q - it will be cooler

- if you won't disenable C1E Support CPU won't be stable at higher frequencies.

 

AMD really has bad memory controllers-I had DDR3 1066 with a Phenom II P920 out performing DDR3 1600 with an 4555M (A8 APU at the same clock speed).

[Belgarathian]

Better cooling doesn't reduce heat output

 

Very true, but it helps with heat dissipation which is more important. 

[Dabombinable]

Very true, but it helps with heat dissipation which is more important. 

But that also doesn't help your power bill (220W for the CPU alone without thinking about graphics cards).

[Belgarathian]

But that also doesn't help your power bill (220W for the CPU alone without thinking about graphics cards).

 

If you're worrying about your power bill as you pack a Corsair AX1200i PSU into the case and trick it out with a custom waterloop and LED strip, I think you may have your priorities wrong. 

[Dabombinable]

If you're worrying about your power bill as you pack a Corsair AX1200i PSU into the case and trick it out with a custom waterloop and LED strip, I think you may have your priorities wrong. 

Lol, if I was worried about power consumption I wouldn't be using my QX6850/Xeon X5450 (it depends on whether or not the ambient temperature is low enough-they run between 50 to 140W). And over 220W for performance that is lower than a CPU which consumes less than 90W.

 

Power consumption+performance+heat output+the cooler required+the expensive high end motherboard are all reasons as to why an FX 9590 is always a bad idea.

[tomas710]

I guess they thought games were going to start taking advantage of 8 core processors.

The issue is that it's debatable that the 8350 and 9590 are 8 cores. Each pair of cores shares cache, so strictly speaking, you can make the argument they are quadcores, which explains why they compete with intel's quadcores and not 6 or 8 core CPUs

[Dabombinable]

The issue is that it's debatable that the 8350 and 9590 are 8 cores. Each pair of cores shares cache, so strictly speaking, you can make the argument they are quadcores, which explains why they compete with intel's quadcores and not 6 or 8 core CPUs

AMD should have from the very beginning marketed its CMT line differently from its previous SMT CPU. CMT has modules not cores, with each module having 2 threads due to each of them having 2 ALU. They are 4 module 8 thread CPU in the same way i7 are 4 core 8 thread CPU. And they can run as a quad core at times due the ALU sharing resources, and 1 having to wait for the other to finish its task. Also if you disable 1 ALU in each module single threaded performance increases.