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

[TheProfosist]

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.

If you want to build a pc to play one game be my guest its just not something that I would ever recommend. This is not me saying go intel because of that but me saying you shouldnt build a pc with a single purpose in mind because your really restricing the pc. Heck most people may just need a gpu upgrade to play bf4 well if that.

Based on how pc gaming works its quitke likely that in the end BF4 will run great on even a 2500K since tons of people still have those. Heck I suspect phenom II x4's like the 955 BE and the 965 BE will still be perfectly fine. The most common resolution for gaming is still 1080p and 60hrz.

But yes if your looking for the ultimate BF4 machine go all AMD especially because of mantle. If you want to push 120+fps maxed out all the time that may very well be what you need to do.

[LAwLz]

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.

Yes that's the TDP, the actual power consumption is higher.

Personally I still find the appalling single threaded performance to be a deal breaker here so I would not recommend it unless the person asking for a suggestion has some really specific usage scenarios or other reasons for going with an AMD processor. Oh well, at least there is now a few (very few) instances where I can recommend the FX 9XXX chips, unlike before when there were absolutely 0 reasons to get one.

[TheProfosist]

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

Games uaually dont use this much cpu which is why im saying its unoptimized. The only game that I have played recently that maxed out anying was planetside 2 and that was with only one thread.

Im not saying it cant ise this much cpu but it would be weird for it to do so since games have been graphics card dependant for quite some time. And from what ive heard at the moment BF4 is cpu bottlenecked. That could mean that some stuff that is normally running on the gpu might be running on the cpu currently who knows.

[Spannerhands]

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.

 

 

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.

 

 

I was not questioning your knowledge, just your throw away one line comment....

[Spannerhands]

Games uaually dont use this much cpu which is why im saying its unoptimized. The only game that I have played recently that maxed out anying was planetside 2 and that was with only one thread.

Im not saying it cant ise this much cpu but it would be weird for it to do so since games have been graphics card dependant for quite some time. And from what ive heard at the moment BF4 is cpu bottlenecked. That could mean that some stuff that is normally running on the gpu might be running on the cpu currently who knows.

 

I am no expert on this but, is it not due to do with the fact this is the first game designed to truly take advantage of multiple core CPU's?  Rather than the CPU just sitting there and letting the GPU do all the work?

[TERAFLOP]

Games uaually dont use this much cpu which is why im saying its unoptimized. The only game that I have played recently that maxed out anying was planetside 2 and that was with only one thread.

Im not saying it cant ise this much cpu but it would be weird for it to do so since games have been graphics card dependant for quite some time. And from what ive heard at the moment BF4 is cpu bottlenecked. That could mean that some stuff that is normally running on the gpu might be running on the cpu currently who knows.

That's exactly the opposite, the game is optimized to make use of more cores, that's why you see excellent core utilization and that's why you see the AMD eight core CPUs dominating.

The AMD 8 core CPUs were simply ahead of their time, no game used to take advantage of the cores very well, now games are significantly improving CPU utilization because of the 8 core AMD CPUs in the next-gen consoles

[LAwLz]

I am no expert on this but, is it not due to do with the fact this is the first game designed to truly take advantage of mutable core CPU's?  Rather than the CPU just sitting there and letting the GPU do all the work?

We don't know. It might also be that it's really badly optimized as of now (because you know, it's in beta). There are a ton of games which can use lots and lots of cores like WoW for example. However, because the way games work most of the functions are very dependent on the result of other functions which means you can't multithread games that well. In WoW for example, it can use a ton of cores, but there are only 2 threads which really need performance (one of which is for sound, and the other one is basically everything else) and the other ~30 threads are so light they might as well run on a single core.

I would be very surprised if Battlefield 4 can use more than 4 cores effectively (as in distribute the load evenly and it actually has a performance benefit).

[Spannerhands]

We don't know. It might also be that it's really badly optimized as of now (because you know, it's in beta). There are a ton of games which can use lots and lots of cores like WoW for example. However, because the way games work most of the functions are very dependent on the result of other functions which means you can't multithread games that well. In WoW for example, it can use a ton of cores, but there are only 2 threads which really need performance (one of which is for sound, and the other one is basically everything else) and the other ~30 threads are so light they might as well run on a single core.

I would be very surprised if Battlefield 4 can use more than 4 cores effectively (as in distribute the load evenly and it actually has a performance benefit).

 

Yes I know its in beta, and do you know the this "beta" version has already been printed to disk... so its only day one update fixes not the whole code... Slight optimizations will be expected...

 

Your how cores work example is very wrong, but don't have time to wright an essay right now... 

[LAwLz]

Your how cores work example is very wrong, but don't have time to wright an essay right now... 

My how cores work? Mind rephrasing that in English? If you mean "your understanding of how cores work" then I have no idea what you're talking about because I never mentioned how a core works. My description of how multithreading in games like WoW works is accurate though. A lot of things do depend on each other in games which makes it impossible to spread workload onto multiple cores in a lot of cases. Why do you think we have had multithreaded programs which can use as many cores as you possibly throw at it for ages, but games can barely use 4 cores effectively?

 

A few threads about why taking advantage of multiple cores in a game is really hard:

Stack Exchange - Multi-threaded games best practices

StackOverflow - Why don't large programs (such as games) use loads of different threads?

Erik McClure - Multithreading Problems In Game Design

MMO-Champion - Wow can use more than two cores (also proves my point that WoW has 2 really heavy threads and then a ton of small and light ones which might as well run on a single core).

[exyia]

wait....

 

if they wanted these CPU's to be "enthusiast" oriented, it's obvious that market of people will choose their own cooling solutions

 

a price cut is a price cut - nothing bad about it

 

but now including a cpu cooler? what so it failed to capture enough enthusiasts, so now they're trying to eek into more mainstream users?

 

sounds like a complete mess of a product launch to me

[Spannerhands]

My how cores work? Mind rephrasing that in English? If you mean "your understanding of how cores work"... 

....but games can barely use 4 cores effectively?

 

My how cores work? Mind rephrasing that in English? If you mean "your understanding of how cores work" < I see what you did there...

 

Because game developers are to used to making games that can be ported from PC to console and vice versa, so they have never looked at the problem... 

[soggyfatman]

Now they just need to lower the price of the cpus without the AiO cooler! Then I can have you 9370...

 

[megadarkwood]

Might actually get the 9370 because why not?

[DudeWazap]

220w, are you mad?!

I personally don't care about tdp mainly becuz I have a 1200w PSU. So I care more about the power a cpu Has.

[Biased Opinion]

you know what, i even without the price drop i kinda want this. Not because of performance but because of the incredible overclocking capabilities, but my haswell system is doing me will.

[Inkz]

Well at least they have some reason now, although a new line of CPUs would be much better than expensive overcloced old ones.

[nicehat]

lol, all you people complaining about tdp. Give me a break man, who cares about tdp honestly. Is electricity that expensive where you are that its a deal breaker? Get a good water cooler and call it a day, this is a good deal. 

[KneesWeak]

Soon, I meant find them soon.

 

I have an FX 8320 overclocked to 4.44Ghz on a Noctua NH-C14 on the stock 1.38v, and I'm already hitting the thermal limits in Prime95, a hyper 212 evo in push pull will in no way shape or form keep your CPU Prime95 stable, I guarantee you that if you prime your system now that it will definitely hit TJ max and shut down within minutes even if you had won the silicone lottery.

So I would NEVER recommend a hyper 212 EVO for more than 4.3-4.4Ghz.

Your setup might very well be stable during gaming, but you'd be hitting risky temperatures & with more games coming out with proper 8 core CPU support you'll see much higher CPU usage & thus higher temperatures.

I have a custom loop right now with a single 240 rad, I'm not saying 4.8 on a hyper 212 but you can definitely be stable at 4.3 if you have a decent 8320, mine can hit 4.3 even while slightly undervolted and the scaling form 4.3 to 4.7 isn't that huge.

[TechFan@ic]

I have a custom loop right now with a single 240 rad, I'm not saying 4.8 on a hyper 212 but you can definitely be stable at 4.3 if you have a decent 8320, mine can hit 4.3 even while slightly undervolted and the scaling form 4.3 to 4.7 isn't that huge.

The way you worded it made it seem as if you were recommending 4.8Ghz on a hyper 212, that seemed a bit weird to me, it was just a misunderstanding.

[TheProfosist]

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.

 

Sorry about taking so long to finally reply to this. To me your looking at the wrong graphs try looking at here on anand http://goo.gl/js9OUA this to me seems more like stuff you would actually do with a processor like that and there are definite noticable increases. 

[TheProfosist]

That's exactly the opposite, the game is optimized to make use of more cores, that's why you see excellent core utilization and that's why you see the AMD eight core CPUs dominating.

The AMD 8 core CPUs were simply ahead of their time, no game used to take advantage of the cores very well, now games are significantly improving CPU utilization because of the 8 core AMD CPUs in the next-gen consoles

 

The architecture was no a head of it time as servers have been using something like that for a while. AMD brought it to the consumer market too soon which is there fault for not understanding how the programs that people run deal with multiple cores.

[TheProfosist]

I personally don't care about tdp mainly becuz I have a 1200w PSU. So I care more about the power a cpu Has.

 

 

lol, all you people complaining about tdp. Give me a break man, who cares about tdp honestly. Is electricity that expensive where you are that its a deal breaker? Get a good water cooler and call it a day, this is a good deal. 

 

 

The concerns are heat output and that it uses so much more power to do only slightly more work. Also there are people that are concerned about power consumption for one reason or another.

[nicehat]

The concerns are heat output and that it uses so much more power to do only slightly more work. Also there are people that are concerned about power consumption for one reason or another.

 

Look, the heat generated from my 8350 at 4.7 is not noticeable. This really isnt something thats going to raise the temps of your room by 5 or 10 degrees. And why cant one underclock/undervolt the CPU to 8350 levels when not doing demanding tasks? Say what you will but convective heat transfer is most efficient with a big radiator. Add some good fans in your case and the heat generated will cool as it gets circulated in your case and eventually dumped out. You can try this by running the AMD stock hs and measuring the amb temps in your room vs those with a AIO or waterloop. 

 

So whats my point? There really isnt that much heat generated that you will notice if you have a loop or a good AIO with some good fans. Of course, your mileage may vary especially due to summer months and room circulation. Now if you want to knock it for being a dumb overpriced binned CPU then thats fine. But I really cant see why TDP is such a big deal. If people are so concerned about TDP, then we ought to be talking more about video cards just as much as we've been doing about these CPUs. To me the reality is, especially on these forums, that its become more of a buzz word than a real purchase point. 

[MbV93]

That's a step in the right direction for these chips, last pricing and how they were sellng them didn't make any sense.

[TheProfosist]

Look, the heat generated from my 8350 at 4.7 is not noticeable. This really isnt something thats going to raise the temps of your room by 5 or 10 degrees. And why cant one underclock/undervolt the CPU to 8350 levels when not doing demanding tasks? Say what you will but convective heat transfer is most efficient with a big radiator. Add some good fans in your case and the heat generated will cool as it gets circulated in your case and eventually dumped out. You can try this by running the AMD stock hs and measuring the amb temps in your room vs those with a AIO or waterloop. 

 

So whats my point? There really isnt that much heat generated that you will notice if you have a loop or a good AIO with some good fans. Of course, your mileage may vary especially due to summer months and room circulation. Now if you want to knock it for being a dumb overpriced binned CPU then thats fine. But I really cant see why TDP is such a big deal. If people are so concerned about TDP, then we ought to be talking more about video cards just as much as we've been doing about these CPUs. To me the reality is, especially on these forums, that its become more of a buzz word than a real purchase point. 

 

What I was trying to say is that the additional heat put out and power consumed for the amount of additional performance you get is way more that it would normally be when the processor/architecture was actually designed to run at that speed with that voltage. Its kinda like running a engine above it power band in a way. So yes im dinging it for being a binned and essentially overclocked cpu. The 8350 depending on what your doing and your budget can be a good choice. Im not against it but these two and I believe thats what this thread is about.

 

On another note if I was going to put money into a full loop i could probably afford a more expensive more powerful processor. 

 

As for why is TDP a big deal? Because you have to buy better stuff just to handle it also seeing TDP's that high when ocing isnt uncommon but thats not a cpu that you have overclocked but a stock cpu. I dont know of any other consumer CPU's that have even been sold with a TDP that high and many consumer cpus have a fraction of its TDP and arnt that far off really. Also dont forget that initially you could only buy thing in a prebuilt system that had parts that were certified to work with the CPU. Then there were bundles you could buy with certain motherboards that had been certified from certain retailers. Now you can finally just buy the CPU but good luck sticking it in to one of the non certified motherboards. To my understanding their certified for the dramatic increase in power draw.

 

Now back to the higher TDP the better stuff you have to buy which applies to anything even GPU's. The higher TDP the bigger PSU you need to buy and the bigger cooler you need to get for it. This is one of the reason why the 690 won out over its dual GPU AMD competition. 

 

Another good analogy I just thought of might be a big ol american V8 vs a german one. The german one it going to be smaller and put out more power in many cases.