Vishera 5Ghz FX-9000/8770

[tajoh111]

So someone buys a FX-9590 and all of a sudden they're arrogant but someone who buys a 3960X isn't?

Interested in seeing how you come to that conclusion.

-PB

There's a huge difference between arrogance(I didn't use this word) and ignorance. Ignorance implies not knowing. Arrogance is better described for AMD for releasing this processor at $800+, regardless of the performance characteristics, pricing of other processors and other characteristics.

To explain why purchasing an fx 9590 is more ignorant than a 3960x is simple. The fx 9590x is the same silicon(down to the same stepping), same amount of cores and chip as fx 8350 or even fx 8320. These processors cost $150-220 dollars. They also have unlocked multipliers too so getting the same frequency is a matter of matching up multipliers.

The 3960x however is unique in a sense that it is the only processor beside the 3930k to have a 6 cores from Intel. The 3930k costs 550 dollars but it a far cry from the around 150-220 dollar range. Thus to get a 6 core from Intel, you need to pay atleast 550 so the marketup isn't as extreme. Plus the 3960x is the fastest processor on the market. In addition, the fx 9590 has performance characteristics are similar to a 4770k but it uses more than double the power and costs 2.5 as much. Plus it overclocks worse for most people.

Thus buying a 9590 makes little sense considering products from Intel(4660k and up) or even AMD(fx8120 and up). The kit guru even showed its overclocking prowess wasn't that special under convention cooling and wasn't stable at standard voltage even at the standard 4.7ghz. 5 ghz didn't even happen under bigger loads unless you overclocked it.

This is directly from the review and I can imagine describes what most informed buyers on what they think of this processor.

"With a TDP of 220W and a price around 700 pounds we do have to ask. What the hell are AMD thinking?"

http://www.kitguru.net/components/cp...te-990fxa-ud5/

The irony of this processor is that this chip is aimed at primarily amateur overclockers( it is mainly being targeted at system builder applications), but under 99.99% of circumstances, this things value decreases vastly under overclocking conditions.

so only the ignorant people or the fan boys will buy this cpu? speaking of ignorant....



ghetto? wtf dude... speaking of moot. speculation time is over the cpu is released. now go to sleep and take your theories to bed with you.

In regards to an earlier post, why I mentioned ghetto is AMD didn't have to spend much money at all and basically no R and D to release this processor. This is AMD attempt to compete with Intel in the ultra high end enthusiast market without having to develop a new chip for it(its not even a new stepping). However it falls terrible short(the silicon of the actual chips shows horribly in the performance and power characteristics) of Intel's effort while costing a similar amount. I think AMD wanted to create a Halo effect with this processor but it fails at that considering the conclusion of that review.

The only saving grace of this processor is it is the first 5ghz processors(but this even comes with caveats) which means very little when the performance is similar to 300 dollar processors.

[tbone8ty]

overclocked Liquid Nitrogen results would be nice to see...

and how easily the 9370 can reach 5ghz (also max OC)

i guess people still cant get over that this is just a show piece for one last hurrah of the desktop FX AM3+ era. and to leave it at that. glad they released it and didn't hold back on the count of of what people might say.

[cdawall]

How so? There is no solid evidence one way or the other but more evidence that we wont actually see an AM3+ Steamroller with 8 cores. I really hope we do, I would love to be able to just drop one into my current motherboard and be done.
As for evidence to the contrary:
Steamroller was bumped off the desktop roadmap for AM3+ (at least till the end of 2013), and is no longer on the roadmap for server sockets either in more than 4 core configurations (through 2014)
AMD has been concentrating more and more on APU's instead of high performance CPU only, and you cant fit a full 8 core with L3 cache and a GPU on the AM3+ socket.
AM3+ is old and AMD never said once that we would see a Steamroller core on this socket. The only thing I have seen confirmed is Steamroller on an FM socket, which was originally supposed to be consolidated between FM2 and AM3+ into one socket for all desktop use.
AMD just "maxed out" their model names for the FX line with a Vishera core release, and fullfilled their promise that we would see 1 more CPU release for this socket.
Nothing new has been announced at all, and all leaked rumors have only mentioned an APU or just talked about the module itself. Nothing on 8-core non-GPU variants.

The only evidence we have right now that we will see an 8-core Steamroller variant on AM3+ is: all other cores have been released so it only follows logic that we will see next models release too.
And that is some pretty flimsy evidence. Still, I do really hope AMD brings us an 8 core Steamroller processor for AM3+.

Nobody said am3+ was the socket amd would use. They are allowed to change sockets after several years.

[solofly]

My local store just got some in...

http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX46698

I found this to be interesting and funny at the same time...

1.This AMD FX Processor does not included a Cooling Solution, which is required and available separately. Due to the extreme heat generated by this processor (220 Watt TDP at stock clock!), an extreme Cooling Solution rated for at least 220 Watts TDP is strongly suggested; even at stock clock rates. The experienced Staff at Memory Express is ready to assist in your selection of suitable cooling solutions.
2.AMD's product warranty does not cover damage caused by overclocking, even when overclocking is enabled via AMD OverDrive? software. Liquid Cooling is desirable with the 220W TDP of the stock FX-9370 CPU.

[i found nemo]

T
In regards to an earlier post, why I mentioned ghetto is AMD didn't have to spend much money at all and basically no R and D to release this processor. This is AMD attempt to compete with Intel in the ultra high end enthusiast market without having to develop a new chip for it(its not even a new stepping). However it falls terrible short(the silicon of the actual chips shows horribly in the performance and power characteristics) of Intel's effort while costing a similar amount. I think AMD wanted to create a Halo effect with this processor but it fails at that considering the conclusion of that review.

so not spending money and making money is ghetto? sure.

[tajoh111]

so not spending money and making money is ghetto? sure.

That is yet to be seen as AMD CPU haven't been making money in years and I doubt this is going to have a dent on their revenue statement. The 9370 might sell a something but it is still a poor value when 2 8320s are 150 dollars and the fx 9320 is 350 dollars.

AMD still has to pay to advertise these processors and bin them.

AMD needs new desktop processors ASAP. This processor is being released just a bit after Haswell has been released. Haswell going to make their sales even worse and further more, if these things get in reviewers hands, this might actually turn out to be anti advertisement for AMD.

I.E People see a 4770k and a fx 9590 in a review. The 4770k comes slightly ahead in most scenarios at stock and constantly ahead when both are overclocked. Considering it uses half the power is $500-550 cheaper. You don't need to buy some sort of water cooling system to cool it. 4770K all of a sudden looks like a steal, even for people with an AMD platform. With that 500 dollars savings, you could buy a motherboard and a new videocard. Heck you could buy a 3930k and a motherboard and have a much faster platform.

Even the reviewer said in the review I posted, what the hell is AMD thinking releasing these at 700 pounds. Negative reviews of a products can help your competition sell processors. This should be one of those cases.

As an upgrade path, it's not going to tempt people with 8320 and 8350 unless they are AMD fans and just want to throw money AMD's way as some sort of charity gesture. They might get a couple hundred mhz but this isn't worth 600-700 dollars. They aren't getting any more cores, a new stepping or anything particularly new. Heck they are not even getting a cooler which at least came with their cheap processor. Even people who want to break records are better off buying 5 or 6 fx83xx since these things are not tested for ln2 or He2 conditions and suicide runs kill processors.

[tbone8ty]

this chip would be a great tester for heatsinks and coolers.

all is not lost

[tajoh111]

this chip would be a great tester for heatsinks and coolers.

all is not lost

This I agree with.

[cdawall]

That is yet to be seen as AMD CPU haven't been making money in years and I doubt this is going to have a dent on their revenue statement. The 9370 might sell a something but it is still a poor value when 2 8320s are 150 dollars and the fx 9320 is 350 dollars.

AMD still has to pay to advertise these processors and bin them.

AMD needs new desktop processors ASAP. This processor is being released just a bit after Haswell has been released. Haswell going to make their sales even worse and further more, if these things get in reviewers hands, this might actually turn out to be anti advertisement for AMD.

I.E People see a 4770k and a fx 9590 in a review. The 4770k comes slightly ahead in most scenarios at stock and constantly ahead when both are overclocked. Considering it uses half the power is $500-550 cheaper. You don't need to buy some sort of water cooling system to cool it. 4770K all of a sudden looks like a steal, even for people with an AMD platform. With that 500 dollars savings, you could buy a motherboard and a new videocard. Heck you could buy a 3930k and a motherboard and have a much faster platform.

Even the reviewer said in the review I posted, what the hell is AMD thinking releasing these at 700 pounds. Negative reviews of a products can help your competition sell processors. This should be one of those cases.

As an upgrade path, it's not going to tempt people with 8320 and 8350 unless they are AMD fans and just want to throw money AMD's way as some sort of charity gesture. They might get a couple hundred mhz but this isn't worth 600-700 dollars. They aren't getting any more cores, a new stepping or anything particularly new. Heck they are not even getting a cooler which at least came with their cheap processor. Even people who want to break records are better off buying 5 or 6 fx83xx since these things are not tested for ln2 or He2 conditions and suicide runs kill processors.

Depends on what you are doing latest review shows the 9590 competing with the 3960x overclocked while the 9590 is at 5ghz in games. I personally could care less how it does in synthetic benchmarks realworld is what matters.

[i found nemo]

that is yet to be seen as amd cpu haven't been making money in years and i doubt this is going to have a dent on their revenue statement. The 9370 might sell a something but it is still a poor value when 2 8320s are 150 dollars and the fx 9320 is 350 dollars.

Amd still has to pay to advertise these processors and bin them.

Amd needs new desktop processors asap. This processor is being released just a bit after haswell has been released. Haswell going to make their sales even worse and further more, if these things get in reviewers hands, this might actually turn out to be anti advertisement for amd.

I.e people see a 4770k and a fx 9590 in a review. The 4770k comes slightly ahead in most scenarios at stock and constantly ahead when both are overclocked. Considering it uses half the power is $500-550 cheaper. You don't need to buy some sort of water cooling system to cool it. 4770k all of a sudden looks like a steal, even for people with an amd platform. With that 500 dollars savings, you could buy a motherboard and a new videocard. Heck you could buy a 3930k and a motherboard and have a much faster platform.

Even the reviewer said in the review i posted, what the hell is amd thinking releasing these at 700 pounds. Negative reviews of a products can help your competition sell processors. This should be one of those cases.

As an upgrade path, it's not going to tempt people with 8320 and 8350 unless they are amd fans and just want to throw money amd's way as some sort of charity gesture. They might get a couple hundred mhz but this isn't worth 600-700 dollars. They aren't getting any more cores, a new stepping or anything particularly new. Heck they are not even getting a cooler which at least came with their cheap processor. Even people who want to break records are better off buying 5 or 6 fx83xx since these things are not tested for ln2 or he2 conditions and suicide runs kill processors.

just shush! Ok you're right we're all wrong we worship you!!

[tajoh111]

Depends on what you are doing latest review shows the 9590 competing with the 3960x overclocked while the 9590 is at 5ghz in games. I personally could care less how it does in synthetic benchmarks realworld is what matters.

A 4770k beats a 3960x in games. The 6 core variants of Intel product line have rarely done well in reviews for gaming, particularly for the dollar. I think a better test would be considering the cost, would be multi GPU configurations and in this scenario, I think we both know AMD loses. Sometimes by a great deal sometimes by a little bit.

[kuroikenshi]

just shush! Ok you're right we're all wrong we worship you!!

LOL just tell him he's right and he will most likely go to another thread.

[Ace123]

They denied Kyle over at hardocp a sample to review and amd flat out told him no haha

[Maxforces]

Depends on what you are doing latest review shows the 9590 competing with the 3960x overclocked while the 9590 is at 5ghz in games. I personally could care less how it does in synthetic benchmarks realworld is what matters.

Really? Do not make joke
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...lrjfEocAKtYd_w
FX all core 5GHz not turbo 5GHz,
After OC
Games:
ARMA 2, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, Max Payne 3, Metro 2033,Civilization V, Shogun 2 Total War, StarCraft 2, Flight Simulator X, WOT,Assassin's Creed, GTA IV, Skyrim, The Witcher 2, DiRT Showdown

All realworld not benchmarks.
3930K cost less than 9590
Welcome to the matrix and wake up.

FX 5ghz 80.8
3930 4.75ghz 108.6
4770 4.8ghz 115.7
competing

Wy need new CPU from AMD not new (old) FX with empty Mhz performance

[cdawall]

Really? Do not make joke
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...lrjfEocAKtYd_w
FX all core 5GHz not turbo 5GHz,
After OC
Games:
ARMA 2, Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, Max Payne 3, Metro 2033,Civilization V, Shogun 2 Total War, StarCraft 2, Flight Simulator X, WOT,Assassin's Creed, GTA IV, Skyrim, The Witcher 2, DiRT Showdown

All realworld not benchmarks.
3930K cost less than 9590
Welcome to the matrix and wake up.

These must all be a lie then. They somehow manage to keep the AMD within 1-2FPS the entire time occassionally beating the 3960x at 4.4ghz. I must just be unable to read.









http://www.kitguru.net/components/cp...te-990fxa-ud5/

[Maxforces]

cdawall do you know word video benchmarks and What difference is in CPU test
Look 400mhz more does not make any difference
http://maxforces.com/articles.php?ar...=67&rowstart=4

[EniGmA1987]

At high resolutions like 2560x1600 the video card is doing the majority of the work and the deciding factor in performance, so when actually playing stuff it doesnt matter very much which processor you have. When the resolution is set really low so the deciding factor becomes CPU power then it shows how far different Vishera is from Ivy and Haswell.

Considering it uses half the power is $500-550 cheaper.

The extra power consumption in an entire year isnt even close to $500 more, if you actually do the math you will see that. Nor do you NEED to run a water cooler if you use a Vishera processor.

[Maxforces]

resolution doesnt matter when you hit the spot depending on cpu

[tbone8ty]

Here we go again!

[EniGmA1987]

resolution doesnt matter when you hit the spot depending on cpu

lol. You know that is comparing AMD to Nvidia in one game right? Not AMD to Intel?

[kuroikenshi]

^^ It's all part of the fun.

you know how its is, add some irrelevant information and hope noone realises it bears no meaning whatsoever.

[Maxforces]

lol. You know that is comparing AMD to Nvidia in one game right? Not AMD to Intel?

Lol
let's put this simple
1 game 2 computers AMD vs Intel, the same place to bench and you have two video cards.

NV computer nr. 1 52.9
NV computer nr2. 43

AMD computer nr1. 48.8
AMD computer nr2. 29.9


difference in computers CPU and motherboard , the rest is the same

Here we go again!

I'm sorry if someone says

the 9590 competing with the 3960x overclocked while the 9590 is at 5ghz in games

you have to say something because this person speak bullshiet.

[Maxforces]

^^ It's all part of the fun.

barbecue well done please

[kuroikenshi]

I feel like this thread is at the end of that flame-thrower getting slammed with non relevant info.

[Jethro]

Vishera @5ghz is a great chip, no doubt in my mind. Kind of the number were all shooting for anyway. The wattage aspect has been done daily for years by many of us already as well.

So really in my mind it is not an awful concept for AMD fans that want AMD,s fastest chip, plug and play.

That price however is embarrassing, plain and simple.

AMD is hot right now (stock has doubled) but they really need to clean house in the marketing department if they wish to fully capitalize off of there recent momentum.