FX 9590 & 9370 CPUs, Now Officially Available Through Retail, With A Few Surprises.

[Opsilon]

You buy an FX 8350, you overclock it, you get the same TDP, keep in mind the TDP here is for thermal output not necessarily power consumption.

Not true 100%, you will not get the same TDP with the 8350 the chance is it will not be able to get to 4.7-5ghz, the fact that this cpu has 220w TDP does not mean that it has that output is true, the 9590 was the CPU most reviewers got, but only it delivers that much heat, an 8350 will maybe deliver 150-180W when clocked to 9370 territory, and so will the 9370 as well and that is intel extreme territory.

For me personally this is old news i have those chips in my country w/o AIO coolers already cheap, the 9370 is just under 50$ more expensive than the 4670k, but is 100$ less expensive than the 4770k, the 9590 cost the same as the i7k.

The 9590 is not really a compelling thing but the 9370 looks the bargain of the century, i don't know how much money i will have next year ( still waiting for an 8 core steamroller announcement ) but if the 9370 remains in stock i just might get it!!!

[TechFan@ic]

Not true 100%, you will not get the same TDP with the 8350 the chance is it will not be able to get to 4.7-5ghz, the fact that this cpu has 220w TDP does not mean that it has that output is true, the 9590 was the CPU most reviewers got, but only it delivers that much heat, an 8350 will maybe deliver 150-180W when clocked to 9370 territory, and so will the 9370 as well and that is intel extreme territory.

For me personally this is old news i have those chips in my country w/o AIO coolers already cheap, the 9370 is just under 50$ more expensive than the 4670k, but is 100$ less expensive than the 4770k, the 9590 cost the same as the i7k.

The 9590 is not really a compelling thing but the 9370 looks the bargain of the century, i don't know how much money i will have next year ( still waiting for an 8 core steamroller announcement ) but if the 9370 remains in stock i just might get it!!!

You're right, because of the higher binning of the 9590 & 9370 they would output less heat & consume less power than typically overclocked 8350s.

The 9370 with the  liquid cooler at $289 is a fairly attractive deal in my opinion, you pay for it the same as you would for an 8350 + a liquid cooler, but you get a chip that overclocks even higher.

 

Great that this has a custom fan speed control software and RGB led to match your build's color scheme. Are there any benchmarks on this cooler yet or are the results pretty close to the H80?

Linus mentioned before on one of the live streams that he had experience with the bundled liquid coolers with the 8150 & 8350 and that they were actually very good, very similar in terms of cooling performance to Corsair's H80.

[ajoy39]

Might have to spring for one now. I need a small AIO cooler for my server anyway and paying just a tad extra for a gaurunteed overclock would be nice. would really like the 5.0 ghz chip but thats still a little rich. Much better though, honestly think these are totally viable products now

[bcredeur97]

Meh.

 

My temps will and power bills will go through the roof if I use that when I'm F@H'ing.

underclock it then. lol

[Bluejay0]

Well I have to say, this is kinda cool (PUN PUN PUN) since they have the liquid cooler included AND have the chips at that price. But for the most part does it still act like a damn 6 Core?

[Fetzie]

All those criticising the TDP, remind me again about what the TDP of an overclocked i7 3960X is?

[TheProfosist]

People are weird, Intel releases a CPU with marginal performance improvements and better efficiency and people yell WE DON'T CARE ABOUT POWER CONSUMPTION, give us more performance.

So get this, AMD releases a CPU with much better performance but higher power consumption, and people yell WE CARE ABOUT POWER CONSUMPTION !

There is quite a big power consumption difference between the chips that your talking about. Also intel's chips arnt just underclocked versions to save power, their new chips.

[TheProfosist]

All those criticising the TDP, remind me again about what the TDP of an overclocked i7 3960X is?

And how much does it crush it in processing power? Also intel doesnt ship them overclocked like mad like amd did then harge you a ton more.

[TERAFLOP]

There is quite a big power consumption difference between the chips that your talking about. Also intel's chips arnt just underclocked versions to save power, their new chips.

The 4960X & the 3970X, they perform almost exactly the same, within 2-3% .

What's the point of improved efficiency on the desktop when we have 250W and 300W graphics cards and actually use multiples of those cards in our builds.

[Katness Everdeen]

The 4960X & the 3970X, they perform almost exactly the same, within 2-3% .

What's the point of improved efficiency on the desktop when we have 250W and 300W graphics cards and actually use multiples of those cards in our builds.

A double standard is what it comes down to really.

[onionring]

When I look at the 9370 at ncix no where does it say it comes with a aio... in fact it says it comes with no cooler.

http://www.ncix.ca/products/?sku=85947&vpn=FD9370FHHKWOF&manufacture=AMD&promoid=1306

[Fetzie]

And how much does it crush it in processing power? Also intel doesnt ship them overclocked like mad like amd did then harge you a ton more.

 

Look at the BF4 benchmark in the OP for an example. The 9370 and 9520 match the 3930K and 3960X pretty much exactly, at a quarter of the respective price.

[Bluejay0]

When I look at the 9370 at ncix no where does it say it comes with a aio... in fact it says it comes with no cooler.

http://www.ncix.ca/products/?sku=85947&vpn=FD9370FHHKWOF&manufacture=AMD&promoid=1306

That's the old package, the new one should be in stock soon.

[Spannerhands]

And how much does it crush it in processing power? Also intel doesnt ship them overclocked like mad like amd did then harge you a ton more.

 

Why are you in the Intel Response Team? that's a typical example of what an Intel Fan-boy comment looks like..

 

"Intel doesn't ship them overclocked like mad"

 

I am sorry they are not overclocked processors they are binned, every FX8000 series processor whats to be an FX9590 but they don't all make it... hence the losers are binned down to lessor models...

AMD does not just pick up a FX8350 out of the box and overclock it to FX9590 standards...

 

No manufacture ships their processors overclocked they ship them at the binned tested level, same with Intel, why do you think the have K processors? as the non K are just failed K's that did not make the grade when tested...

 

Just become the lineup of AMD is different allowing you to overclock everything...

 

What gets me is that AMD had a FX8350 which could not overclock and an FX8350K (which is a FX9590) no one would batter an eyelid... 

[TheProfosist]

The 4960X & the 3970X, they perform almost exactly the same, within 2-3% .

What's the point of improved efficiency on the desktop when we have 250W and 300W graphics cards and actually use multiples of those cards in our builds.

Compare the 3960 and 4960 and youll see better improvement. The increase is more than 2-3% either way so I dont know where your getting your numbers. You can look at 2700k to 3770k or 2600k, the percent increase will be about the same since they use the same architecture.

Well for the mainstream user power efficiency is great but your quoting the E parts which are based on the xeons which in that case they alao endorse more power efficiency cause umpteen of them are being run at once. As for your comparisons with gpus running ones that powerfull and multiples of them. In the consumer market the numberbof people that do that is very tiny compared to the rest. Also you cpu is always doing stuff its far more used and fulky utilized than the gpu since eveeything runs on it and its sometimes assisted by a gpu. If you have your gpu's in sli the additional cards when not gaming are just idling. Also youbalways do have the option of running multiple cpus just like you would graphics cards which up until recently was far more common in workstations and servers than running multiple graphics cards.

I would also like to tack on what do you need more processing power for specifically? And if you really do need more why havnt you looked away from cinsumer setups yet?

A double standard is what it comes down to really.

The point is that its just a OC the TDP went up durastically but performance did not. A change in architecture is different that binning and factory OCing your chips to try and keep up with your competitor's stock chips. This is while selling them at stupid high prices that only your most devote followers will buy them at.

[Warcony]

People are weird, Intel releases a CPU with marginal performance improvements and better efficiency and people yell WE DON'T CARE ABOUT POWER CONSUMPTION, give us more performance.

So get this, AMD releases a CPU with much better performance but higher power consumption, and people yell WE CARE ABOUT POWER CONSUMPTION !

 

You sir, deserve a BIG cookie for this!

[TheProfosist]

Look at the BF4 benchmark in the OP for an example. The 9370 and 9520 match the 3930K and 3960X pretty much exactly, at a quarter of the respective price.

And BF4 beta is currently and unoptimized turd. Also I really wish that so many people on this forums would realize that PCs are good for way more than just the latest game. This also makes me think that SteamOS and the Steam Machines have a far greater possible market share that I thought.

[TERAFLOP]

Compare the 3960 and 4960 and youll see better improvement. The increase is more than 2-3% either way so I dont know where your getting your numbers. You can look at 2700k to 3770k or 2600k, the percent increase will be about the same since they use the same architecture.

The point is that its just a OC the TDP went up durastically but performance did not. A change in architecture is different that binning and factory OCing your chips to try and keep up with your competitor's stock chips. This is while selling them at stupid high prices that only your most devote followers will buy them at.

Where I got my numbers ? perhaps I read Tom's Hardware review or in fact any 4960X review, they all tell the same story.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4960x-ivy-bridge-e-benchmark,3557-7.html

The 4960X is not only BARELY faster than the 3970X, by 1% or 2%, it was in fact SLOWER in many cases, and performed exactly the same in many others.

Oh look, it's a second faster

Look at that, it shaved an entire 2 seconds off.

In any case, I don't want this to turn into a benchmarking battle, so I apologize in advance, but the fact of the matter remains, Intel gives us little to no performance improvements & reduces power consumption, something that we as desktop users, especially gamers wouldn't care about at all, 30W is less than my bathroom light.

[Fetzie]

And BF4 beta is currently and unoptimized turd. Also I really wish that so many people on this forums would realize that PCs are good for way more than just the latest game. This also makes me think that SteamOS and the Steam Machines have a far greater possible market share that I thought.

 

And you build the PC based on what you need. And if you are looking at BF4 benchmarks, I'm going to expect that you're looking to play a lot of BF4. If the game goes live with those benchmarks being accurate, then why not say that the 9590 is the best CPU for BF4? If somebody wants to do something else, they should be looking at benchmarks of whatever they want to do. As the benchmarking stands RIGHT NOW, the 9590 is better than a 3960X at BF4. This may change, it may not. Nobody knows. Maybe the optimizations will put one or the other even further in front. Maybe the optimizations will narrow the field, bringing the 3570Ks and 2600Ks closer to the top. Nobody knows.

[Spannerhands]

And BF4 beta is currently and unoptimized turd. Also I really wish that so many people on this forums would realize that PCs are good for way more than just the latest game. This also makes me think that SteamOS and the Steam Machines have a far greater possible market share that I thought.

 

And i bet if Intel was doing better it would not be such an unoptimized turd would it... 

[TERAFLOP]

You sir, deserve a BIG cookie for this!

Well thank you sir, I was just pointing out the obvious.

[Spannerhands]

Well thank you sir, I was just pointing out the obvious.

 

It might be obvious to you, but lost on so many others sadly...

[TERAFLOP]

It might be obvious to you, but lost on so many others sadly...

It's all because of the bad press AMD gets, Intel just has such an enormous marketing presence.

Even folks that know their stuff, like Linus & Slick get affected by this marketing crap.

 

[TheProfosist]

Why are you in the Intel Response Team? that's a typical example of what an Intel Fan-boy comment looks like..

"Intel doesn't ship them overclocked like mad"

I am sorry they are not overclocked processors they are binned, every FX8000 series processor whats to be an FX9590 but they don't all make it... hence the losers are binned down to lessor models...

AMD does not just pick up a FX8350 out of the box and overclock it to FX9590 standards...

No manufacture ships their processors overclocked they ship them at the binned tested level, same with Intel, why do you think the have K processors? as the non K are just failed K's that did not make the grade when tested...

Just become the lineup of AMD is different allowing you to overclock everything...

What gets me is that AMD had a FX8350 which could not overclock and an FX8350K (which is a FX9590) no one would batter an eyelid...

Please dont call my IRT membership into question. I am quite knowledge able when it comes to intel products ranging all well over 10 years. I have also used AMD cpus nearly as long as they were far more competitive until the launch of sany bridge.

Fine their not over clocked their just binned (which i did state in one of my posts) and running at a speed at which their architecture is not optimized for which is why their TDP jumps what almost 100 watts (95 to be exact). They dont take a 8350 and make it a 9590 but they sure didnt design a new chip to be the 9590 or change the manufacturing they just binned more, tighter, and higher. I mean I could be wrong about this but that is my understanding.

All K means is that the multiplier is unlocked. The cpu is only binned to its specified frequencies. For the 2011 chips and haswell you can also oc the base clock. This is the same as AMD's BE chips (black edition) they are not binned to reach a certain oc just their stock specs and the multiplied is unlocked. Intel's mainsteam K chips were a response to AMD have BE chips throughout their line back in the phenom II and c2d/c2q era maybe even slightly before that.

I dont get what you were trying to say with your last sentence but I will say that im am not trying to put AMD down for what they did with the chips initially as stupid as I think it is. I actually think where they are now is where they should have launched at but from what I head they still sold chips at those prices so why wouldnt you. What I am trying to defend in the corelation between AMD releasing a chip with a higher clock speed and much higher tdp and intel releasing their ivy-e chips to replace their sandy-e chips because there just isnt one.

[WittItDew]

for me the Intel Core i7 is cheaper for me to get 

 

 

http://www.microcenter.com/product/413248/Core_i7_4770K_35GHz_Socket_LGA_1150_Boxed_Processor

 

Yup just bought this puppy a week ago, was going to get the 4670k... then I said fuck it and bought the 4770k at that price