FX 9590 -> ?

[pbassjunk]

I've got the itch.

First, is AMD essentially dead? The APU stuff looks neat and I'm sure will have a long successful life, but I'm much more interested in the best of the best by way of bruteforce V12/Hemi processing, both single and multicore.

Second, assuming Intel is the default upgrade, is there a new gen or revision on the horizon (6ish months, so christmas 2014) that would make sense to wait for?

No real price limit, but no $$$extreme$$$ CPUs. I'd prefer to reuse existing components, so this is basically a MB/CPU swap. I don't overclock (not interested) and while my 9590 does everything I throw at it admirably, I still want more. Shaving a minute off a Handbrake encode is worth the $. No problem with $2011$ either if that's a boost over ¢1150¢. Had a 3820 which semi-side-graded into the 8350, into the 9590.

Also, I hackintosh a lot and FX just isn't cutting it (but huge props to the amd osx86rs who've been making it work!).

 

[drescherjm]

I would say wait for haswell-E for now. There is nothing on the AMD side that is better or will be better than your current CPU until excavator in 2015 possibly 2016.

I don't overclock (not interested)

Hmm. The 9590 is basically a factory overclock.

 

[defaultluser]

I would say wait for haswell-E for now. There is nothing on the AMD side that is better or will be better than your current CPU until excavator in 2015 possibly 2016.



Hmm. The 9590 is basically a factory overclock.

Problem with this suggestion is that Haswell e is ddr4.

If you want faster encodes without the added cost of new ram, ivy e six core is your only option

 

[MacLeod]

You're pretty much looking at a I7-4790K. 4.0 stock clocks and 4.4 turbo should be a very nice CPU upgrade over your FX. Haswell-E will be a little better but I'm thinking it's gonna be pretty expensive with the DDR4 memory.

You could always do an IB-E system with a 4930K so you'd get 6 cores. You'd be a generation behind in architecture but compared to your FX, it'll be a light speed jump in performance.

 

[Wascrash]

I would say wait for haswell-E for now. There is nothing on the AMD side that is better or will be better than your current CPU until excavator in 2015 possibly 2016.



Hmm. The 9590 is basically a factory overclock.

I don't think its worth the money to upgrade now for what you want. Your cpu kicks ass. Use your gpu to encode if you want to really do it fast.

 

[pbassjunk]

I would say wait for haswell-E for now. There is nothing on the AMD side that is better or will be better than your current CPU until excavator in 2015 possibly 2016.



Hmm. The 9590 is basically a factory overclock.

Haha yeah, that's why I switched from the 8350 to the 9590.. let Asus and AMD do the overclock for me.

I can wait, short of the system burning itself up or the kids spilling something in the case, meh, it works.



That compulsive itch is hard to resist though.

 

[KazeoHin]

On waiting for an X99 system: DDR4 will be pretty cool, launch speeds of 2133, 2666 and 3200. Only problem is that the launch will only have 4 and 8 gb modules, which means a DDR4 system will have less RAM capacity than a DDR3 system until higher capacity DIMMs hit the market. So, if you FULLY loaded a HW-E X99 board with Launch DDR4, you would still only have 32gb. Versus the 64gb available on X79. Down the line, however, manufacturers intend for 32gb non-registered DIMMs to hit retail. Meaning a 'Z107' system would be able to reach 64Gb, and a X99 system would reach a massive 128gb! Speeds are likely to hit ~4200mhz, wich would be the theoretical limit, unless CPUs get a hell of a lot faster.

 

[rhansen5_99]

I went from the 8350 to the i7 2687w at work an I would say that is a baler for crunching through multi threaded applications like Keyshot and rendering stuff. That being said not sure if socket 2011 is worth investing in at this point with the ddr4 stuff right around the corner. But 8 cores of intel goodness is pretty sweet (not $2k on my dime sweet ).

 

[DeathFromBelow]

I went from an FX 8320 @ 4.8GHz to an i7 4930k. Its not worth the upgrade, IMO. Even with the 4930k running at 4.5GHz and faster quad-channel RAM the real world difference isn't noticeable most of the time. Unless you're demonstrably CPU limited its really difficult to justify an upgrade right now.

I don't really understand when people say AMD is dead. I mean, yeah, Intel has a significant IPC advantage right now, but most software isn't CPU limited right now. If you're doing work that actually benefits from 6-8 cores and you aren't overclocking then AMD's FX chips are actually a really good value.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

I went from an FX 8320 @ 4.8GHz to an i7 4930k. Its not worth the upgrade, IMO. Even with the 4930k running at 4.5GHz and faster quad-channel RAM the real world difference isn't noticeable most of the time. Unless you're demonstrably CPU limited its really difficult to justify an upgrade right now.

I don't really understand when people say AMD is dead. I mean, yeah, Intel has a significant IPC advantage right now, but most software isn't CPU limited right now. If you're doing work that actually benefits from 6-8 cores and you aren't overclocking then AMD's FX chips are actually a really good value.

In a way you are right. But what we experience as AMD users that do wish to upgrade to something newer seems that we are stuck with Piledriver based solutions. That Piledriver still can keep up even if it is 2 years (in October) old

So for our desktop we can buy FM2+ but that platform really does not do it for the most of us. On the desktop there is nothing new out there until 2016???

 

[Comixbooks]

I went from FX8350 to 4770K I was die hard AMD until I got a Intel Retail Edge Processor
paired with a Z97 thermal armor Sabertooth motherboard which is dead quiet cause of the controlled fan speeds on the board.

 

[DeathFromBelow]

I went from FX8350 to 4770K I was die hard AMD until I got a Intel Retail Edge Processor
paired with a Z97 thermal armor Sabertooth motherboard which is dead quiet cause of the controlled fan speeds on the board.

If I were building a new system for somebody I'd probably go with the latest socket 1150 chips, but I can't see any justification for sidegrading from a current FX chip to a current Intel chip. The power savings are unlikely to be worth it over the life of the system, the real-world performance difference usually isn't worth it, and you could buy a quieter cooling solution for the FX chip for less than the cost of a new Intel chip/board.

I have an older FX 8120 at stock speed in a uATX 880g board. My UPS shows it pulls 80-90w under most loads and it's pretty much silent. If we're talking about overclocking you're going to need a decent cooler to keep either Intel or AMD chips quiet.

In a way you are right. But what we experience as AMD users that do wish to upgrade to something newer seems that we are stuck with Piledriver based solutions. That Piledriver still can keep up even if it is 2 years (in October) old

So for our desktop we can buy FM2+ but that platform really does not do it for the most of us. On the desktop there is nothing new out there until 2016???

It's no different on the Intel side, I mean, it's hard to justify going from Sandy Bridge to Devil's Canyon too. AMD and Intel are both focused on cutting power consumption rather than performance right now.

 

[Rauelius]

I've noticed that even at stock, my FX 8350 is virtually indistinguishable from my 3770k and 2600k when using the same GPU. That being said, in benchmarks the Intels dominate. Only tangible upgrade path from a 9590 would be the Six-Core Intels and possible the 4790k. And that's for mostly media editing applications, as for games, as I said I noticed no difference and I run a 120hz monitor.

 

[MacLeod]

Yeah I keep thinking Im going to jump ship over to Intel and was going to with Devils Canyon but now that I see its no better than a 4770K really Im probably not going to especially considering my 8150 is still doing a fine job. Its stable enough that it runs with Cool n Quiet enabled so my idle cores are running at 1.4 GHz @ .85V so power draw is not a problem and its running cool enough that my H100 can keep it in the low 40's while gaming on the lowest fan setting. Im sure I wouldnt win any benchmark competitions with Intel owners but for my gaming at 1920x1080 off a single GTX670 which usually runs at or damn near 100% while gaming, Im just not going to see any benefit from a $500 drop on a new i7 and Z97 motherboard.

I think Im probably just going to invest in a new GPU probably something like a GTX780 and keep my 670 for PhysX then drop a 8350 in and put a nice overclock on it and I think Ill be fine for another year or so.

But yeah, if I were building from scratch Id be Intel all day but for existing 8300 and even 8100 owners there isnt a whole lot of reason to upgrade other than just wanting a new shiny toy to play with which IS a valid reason by the way.

Thats just a sad testament to the workloads we're getting lately when a 2 year old FX 8300 (or even a 4 year old 8100) can offer plenty of CPU horsepower for the vast majority of applications out there. With everything catering to tablets and smart phones there just isnt much hardcore out there.

**edit**

Just talked myself into it and Amazon has the 8350 for $169 shipped thru Prime so I just pulled the trigger on it (thru the [H] commissioned link of course) and it should be here Tuesday. Hope I dont get a dud and can at least get 4.5 GHz out of it. Thatll still be a 10-15% IPC improvement.

This forum is going to get me divorced. 2nd time in a month Ive talked myself into buying something new (new PSU) after posting about it here .

 

[TMCM]

My plan is to just wait until the DDR4 standards are in place and the memory doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I think my OC'd phenom II can last me until late 2015 - mid 2016.

 

[geok1ng]

looking at press releases and roadmaps, there will not be a mid to hiogh end desktop processor from amd in the foreseeable future.
the only hope, and it is a very slim one, is that some motherboard manufacture release a G34 mobo capable of overclocking, to make an opteron version of EVGA SR-2.
on the other hand, amd is very close to achieving single chip 1080p gaming machines. APUs have shown to be a very smart compute unit, with amazing cost x performance in clusters.

 

[Rauelius]

Just talked myself into it and Amazon has the 8350 for $169 shipped thru Prime so I just pulled the trigger on it (thru the [H] commissioned link of course) and it should be here Tuesday. Hope I dont get a dud and can at least get 4.5 GHz out of it. Thatll still be a 10-15% IPC improvement.

This forum is going to get me divorced. 2nd time in a month Ive talked myself into buying something new (new PSU) after posting about it here .

I found the FX-8350 to be a MUCH better chip than the 8150. I had stability problems with every Zambezi I tried(two 8120s and two 8150s), so I avoided them. Glad I gave it another shot as for newer games like Watchdogs and Wolfenstien(what's with the canine theme this month?) the FX-8350 handsomely outclasses most if not all Intel i5s. Makes sense since the consoles that these games are ported from use 8-Core CPUs, so logically a CPU with 8-Threads will run software designed for 8-Threads better than one with just 4 threads, regardless of the IPC.

 

[MacLeod]

I found the FX-8350 to be a MUCH better chip than the 8150. I had stability problems with every Zambezi I tried(two 8120s and two 8150s), so I avoided them. Glad I gave it another shot as for newer games like Watchdogs and Wolfenstien(what's with the canine theme this month?) the FX-8350 handsomely outclasses most if not all Intel i5s. Makes sense since the consoles that these games are ported from use 8-Core CPUs, so logically a CPU with 8-Threads will run software designed for 8-Threads better than one with just 4 threads, regardless of the IPC.

I think youre right cause it looks like I finally, for the first time since I started overclocking in 2009, won the silicon lottery cause this thing is looking like a golden chip. I gotta hit the hay now so cant do anymore testing but Im at 4.815 right now at 1.40V and Cool n Quiet enabled and just cruising thru OCCT with temps in the low 50's. I cant wait to get home tomorrow and keep pushing this thing. Looks like 4.9 is almost certain and here's to hoping I got one of the 9590 binned chips and this baby can hold 5.0 24/7!

If not Im still stoked. My 8150 was doing 4.5 so considering the 10-15% IPC improvement, even if 4.8 is all this thing will do, thats still going to be around a 25% performance boost for me. Now I just need a GTX780 to go with it. My GOD will this sickness ever end?!?!

 

[cageymaru]

@5.0GHz, my PC was emitting so much heat that I figured that 4.7GHz was good enough. With that said see if you can massage it to 5.1GHz. That's where my Vishera told me to take my hand out of the cookie jar. I was still in the 1.4v range though. These Asus Sabertooh 990FX revision 1 motherboards are mighty nice huh MacLeod?

 

[MacLeod]

@5.0GHz, my PC was emitting so much heat that I figured that 4.7GHz was good enough. With that said see if you can massage it to 5.1GHz. That's where my Vishera told me to take my hand out of the cookie jar. I was still in the 1.4v range though. These Asus Sabertooh 990FX revision 1 motherboards are mighty nice huh MacLeod?

Definitely love this board and it's why Sabertooth boards are my favorite regardless of chipset or socket. This old girl has housed a 1090 @ 4.0 GHz, my old 8150 @ 4.5 GHz and now this 8350.

So far the heat out of the case isn't that bad but then my computer room is in my finished basement and its always pretty cool down there so ambient temps are always on the low side.

 

[pbassjunk]

Got another question, which is going to take this thread in a nearly opposite direction...



A friend of mine just gave me a ton of old hardware (he's moving out of the country and can't take it with him). Among other things, I've now got the makings for an entire i7 2600k system.

I'm thinking about keeping the 2600k and selling off the 9590. I realize this really is the opposite of the '9590 upgrade itch' from my first post, but this will take care of my hackintosh requirements and I won't have to spend any money to do so.

How much of a downgrade would 9590 to 2600k be? Also, I've never been an overclocker but would learning to OC the 2600k make up any difference in performance?

 

[MacLeod]

I hate to admit it but it wouldnt be a downgrade. A 2600K, especially overclocked would still be a bad ass CPU even today. Its only around 12% slower than Haswell cause remember there wasnt that big a jump in performance from Sandy to Ivy to Haswell.

 

[doug_7506]

Also, I've never been an overclocker but would learning to OC the 2600k make up any difference in performance?

Sandy-bridge CPUs love to be OC'ed. Most 2500k/2600k that i've seen hit 4.3+ with no effort.

I hit 4.6ghz on my 2500k by simply changing the multiplier to 46.

BUT, make sure you have a decent cooler on there. Don't try that with the stock intel HSF

And yeah, seems the 2600k surpasses the 9590

Unfortunately my go to site, anadtech, doesnt have the 9590 benched.

 

[Deacon_Jones1988]

I am an AMD guy, but given AMD's current trajectory in the High end cpu department, next time around I am going with intel, Because they are not coming out with anything worth looking at anytime soon, except for Excavator. But I will probably have the "itch" long before that thing rolls out.

Thanks, good luck with that itch!

Stay [H]

 

[pbassjunk]

Well I listened to all the great advice and ignored it Hehe thank you guys!

Bought a 4790k (microcenter) and Gigabyte matx (newegg) (and of course see this morning that there is a $399 bundle deal for buying both @ newegg that saves about $10 over what I paid - oh well). Also bought a white Prodigy ATX case + a few extra Bitfenix fans.

Pairing all that with a GTX 590, 16GB, a bunch of SSD (1+ TB), Kuhler 620 w/ pushpull (if it fits), etc. I've got 3 high end PSU (1200w raidmax, 900w antec HCG and a 1000w gold BFG) so whichevver one fits easiest.

Sold the FX 9590 and Asus and between those it nearly covered the newegg + MC discount bundle. Haven't built yet, but I'm expecting it'll be worth it.

!
Thanks

 

[pbassjunk]

Figured I would throw my andecdotal experience out there now that I've been using the 4790k for a little while.

Don't bother.

Hackintosh is working properly and that's the really what I was wanting, but my Handbrake encoding speed has actually dropped. My Plex encode settings (variation of Normal w/ large file size, decomb fast, x264 preset fast, 16RF, 1280x) I'd run 130-150fps on a bluray conversion. The 4790k is averaging 119. Disappointing. Games are just as fast/smooth as they were on the AMD. I don't have buyers remorse or anything, but in hindsight the whole endeavor wasn't worth it outside of much smoother osx86. That's kind of what the general consensus was, but I wanted to put it out there for anyone else feeling the gas.

Don't listen the 'FX has lower ipc blah blah' pessimism, it may be an on-paper statistic, but it really just doesn't matter.



Interested to see how the power bill plays out over time.


FWIW, after parting out the MB and CPU on ebay, the 'upgrade' really only set me back $30ish out of pocket, so not complaining.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

I'm waiting for the FX8300 AMD announced it in China that it is coming so I'm jumping I think
I never had any real problems with performance for what I'm doing but certain things might be nice if i can get it at the right price .

 

[rhansen5_99]

Well with encode stuff is really where the real cores versus the hyper threaded stuff really shine. If you want a super encoder you could always look at the g34 socket stuff where you could get 32 cores... but you are going to spend a fortune On a side note that 4790k should be able to make up some ground overclocking. I am not sure what you could get to but I have heard of people getting near 5ghz.

 

[MacLeod]

Figured I would throw my andecdotal experience out there now that I've been using the 4790k for a little while.

Don't bother.

Games are just as fast/smooth as they were on the AMD.

Don't listen the 'FX has lower ipc blah blah' pessimism, it may be an on-paper statistic, but it really just doesn't matter.

Oh shit, now youve done it.

 

[ssnyder28]

Hackintosh is working properly and that's the really what I was wanting, but my Handbrake encoding speed has actually dropped. My Plex encode settings (variation of Normal w/ large file size, decomb fast, x264 preset fast, 16RF, 1280x) I'd run 130-150fps on a bluray conversion. The 4790k is averaging 119. Disappointing. Games are just as fast/smooth as they were on the AMD. I don't have buyers remorse or anything, but in hindsight the whole endeavor wasn't worth it outside of much smoother osx86. That's kind of what the general consensus was, but I wanted to put it out there for anyone else feeling the gas.

So you were expecting the amd quad core cpu to outperform a octo core? From all of the benchmarks I've seen the 9590 beats hyperthreaded quad i7s in programs like handbrake (real cores outperform logical cores). Also keep in mind that the 9590 is a heavily overclocked cpu, did you OC the 4790K yet?