AMD FX 9000?

[Johan45]

@Johan ...... Acording top a some what reliable source they have then in stock at the warehouse with possible release date of the 16th ..... Could be why everypone is out of stock, they are just waiting for the 16th.

That was the impression I got but it'd be a cold day in hell before I spent that much on any CPU. Now if I had unlimited funds to just play with things like that then maybe!!

 

[DaaG]

For sale HERE

One thing to note, this says supports 2133mhz memory, the 8350 according to AMD HERE supports 1866mhz

I still dont think a improved IMC is worth extra $500 to get to 2133mhz stock.

ALSO SOLD HERE so far $611 for the 9590 and $350 for 9370

 

[hokiealumnus]

Ouch, that's painful. Google tells me 683.99 British Pound Sterling equals 1034.53 US Dollar.

It takes the entire AMD price-for-performance thing and tosses it out the window. I'd rather buy three 4770K's and watch every one of them beat the performance of the FX-9590.

 

[DaaG]

Whats messed up is that was IN stock when I first found it on amazon that is.

 

[hokiealumnus]

Your edit wasn't there before. $611 is...well, it's still horrible, but not as horrible as a grand.

 

[Bobnova]

this same guy has his FX8150 running at 5.2GHZ stable with max temps around 38*C.......

Max temps while sitting idle with the screensaver disabled maybe

Wouldn't surprise me at all if it doesn't come with a cooler, AMD's after profits and including a cooler of the required quality (read: >$80) makes a dent.

What I want to see is the revision number. I'd like to know whether this is a factory-binned-to-hell 8350 or a factory-binned-to-hell new revision.

Either way, I bet it finally beats a 3770k stock:stock. $600 though, ew. That's competing against a 3930k. Both appear to require expensive motherboards, though neither the sabertooth (what revision? lol. For a "top quality" board they sure go through a lot) or CHVwhatever is nearly as likely to suffer from Suddenly Flaming MOSFET Syndrome as X79 is.

In a perfect world it'd be a new revision that doesn't have to be binned at a 5% success rate (made up on the spot) to hit 5GHz.
In the real world, it smells of TWKR.

 

[ATMINSIDE]

nearly as likely to suffer from Suddenly Flaming MOSFET Syndrome as X79 is.
In the real world, it smells of TWKR.

+1 to that.


Mmmmmmm TWKR

 

[Johan45]

Don't know how reliable this is and haven't had time to fully read it but I found a review.

 

[RGone]

Don't know how reliable this is and haven't had time to fully read it but I found a review.

I read most of it for you "Johan" and this was about what I expected.

Copied from link at KitGuru:
With both Corsair H100i and BeQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 2 coolers the FX9590 would idle around 36c-39c and rise to around 60c under load (room ambient temperature 22c). Any higher voltage for clock speeds above 5ghz would have dramatically negative effects for the load temperatures and stability, surpassing either cooling solution. We are sure there is more headroom from the processor, but it will need some seriously hardcore cooling to get above 5ghz. We also found that the FX9590 would throttle with a lesser cooler also, even at 4.7ghz, so attention needs to be paid to this. End Copy.

Ah hah, need awesome freeken cooling and on their mini-loops they could not exceed 5.0Ghz stable. Where have I seen that before?
RGone...

 

[Johan45]

every day right here in the good ol OCF. I already have one of those.

 

[caddi daddi]

let me see just how stupid I am.
I push 4.9 24/7 on all 8 cores of a $179 processor and turbo core it up to 5.2.
they want me to shell out a grand so I can run 4.7 24/7 and turbo 5.0?
man, that's the deal of the year.......

 

[Ajay57]

How much for this ???? FX-9590 and it can not beat a stock i7-4770k @ 3.5Ghz!!

1, http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/amd-fx9590-5ghz-review-w-gigabyte-990fxa-ud5/10/

Very sad to see this, plus the extra heat as well!


I can not read anymore of that review even my SandyBridge beats the pants off of it. My only wish would to see something positive from AMD for once!!

 

[bassnut]

Well at least someone has some stock ......

http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=4_1210_64&item_id=061825

 

[Culbrelai]

In case you guys didn't see it, here is our review of the FX-8350, which had 4.9 GHz results, on all cores. This CPU doesn't get all four cores at 5 GHz, it's max tubro, so only half the cores will go to 5.0 GHz.

The FX-8350 is a good CPU at a good price. I like AMD, I think that CPU is perfect at its price point. No, it won't trounce Intel - especially at power efficiency - but nobody should feel bad about considering going that route. The FX-9590 is a good CPU at what's rumored to be a horrible price.

I've gone to all of the system builder pages AMD linked to and, while they claim availability, not one of them has these listed in their configurations. I would like to confirm the price difference before passing judgement, but if these are anywhere near (or even within $500 of) $900, this is a CPU for suckers.

That review...

Did that compare an overclocked AMD processor to non-overclocked Intels, and then claim it 'won'?

...

 

[hokiealumnus]

Only if you are incapable of actually reading and understanding what the words put together into sentences mean and then try to parse it into something a child could read.

Let me dumb it down for you. It is priced where it should be and isn't a bad CPU for the money, but it's nowhere near as power efficient as Intel's offerings. Is that easier for you to understand?

 

[Mandrake4565]

Copied From RGone:

We are sure there is more headroom from the processor, but it will need some seriously hardcore cooling to get above 5ghz. We also found that the FX9590 would throttle with a lesser cooler also, even at 4.7ghz, so attention needs to be paid to this.

As soon as I read this I hear echos of the Gonster reiterating the need for extra special cooling at high clocks.

From what I've seen and read in reviews, these chip look like nothing more then binned 8350's that are OC'ed. I may be proven wrong but so far all it looks like is a $650.00 price tag on top of a 8350 for the name FX-9590. Maybe if I write on my 8350 with a sharpie, "FX 9590" I can get $900.00 for it.

 

[RGone]

with a sharpie, "FX 9590" I can get $900.00 for it.

nO. Uh well, make that maybe. Since AMD will sell some of their stuff, you might also.

RGone...

 

[Johan45]

Just seen it available from Origin PC builers. The gamers will grab this just because it's 5.0G and they have the cash. That review I posted earlier, the gaming end of it the FX went toe to toe with the i73960x OC'd to 4.4. That's no slouch but is it worth the premium? to some yes for most of us no.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

From what I've seen and read in reviews, these chip look like nothing more then binned 8350's that are OC'ed. I may be proven wrong but so far all it looks like is a $650.00 price tag on top of a 8350 for the name FX-9590. Maybe if I write on my 8350 with a sharpie, "FX 9590" I can get $900.00 for it.

That's an old-FX-like price tag! (Think Athlon 64 FX53 and Athlon 64 FX55.)
And the FX53, back in the single core era, could OC to FX55 speed. Looks like history repeating itself.

And also reminds me of Athlon 64 FX57, Athlon 64 FX60 and Athlon 64 FX62 (2006 or 2007), when Intel was about to kick butt with the first generation Core 2 Duo! FX62 apparently was just an OC'ed FX60.
2006 was a rough time for AMD! And 2007 was worse for AMD!

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

Pft, slower and more expesive than the competition.... Come on AMD, you're the guys that tought us during the A64 days that clock speed means jack.

Sounds more like Intel in 2003. With the Gallatin and the like.