Well long story short i went on youtube and watch a vid about the new fx-9590, then commented saying I would rather just buy a intel i7-3930k and spend the extra money on a better gpu. Since it being youtube and all a lot of people got butthurt by that comment. I wasn't trying to come out being a fanboy or anything I just think the i7 is the better deal. Only benchmarks I've seen from AMD fx-9590 was against the i7 4770k, which is a $300 cpu. Since this site is much more civil then youtube I figure i would like to see other opinion on which is the better cpu. I think intel's ipc even at a lower clock rate is still a better cpu, even if it's not the i7 can easily be overclocked.
So what cpu do you guys think is better and why?
3930k, 3930k, 3930k, 3930k, 3930k.
More PCIe lanes, much, much stronger per-core performance, great overclocking, much stronger chipset, more RAM options, and overall much better price/performance on an already outrageously overpriced CPU.
This, This, This, This, This.
This is just another underdog Pentium 4EE or FX-53.
I have an FX-8350 and I don't see why people are buying into these binned 8350 cores with 8 MB extra L3 Cache. It's the GTX Titan all over again.
I have a hard time understanding why the Fx-9590 even exists... Anyone looking for a ridiculously high priced cpu should be going Intel anyways. I love my 8350 but this 9590 thing is more than facepalm worthy.
Yeah I figured it was better. I still don't understand why it's price so high. Hell, the price difference between the fx-9590 over the intel i7 3930k is enough to buy your self a highend graphics card. I think the reasoning why AMD is only selling it to computer manufactures is just to trick people into buying it. Someone who doesn't know much about cpu's will see that 5ghz and assume it's amazing. Is their even a difference between the fx 9590 over the fx 8350 except for clock rate?
Its expensive to bin the 8350 base silicon. Millions of dollars worth of R&D went into pulling 10,000-20,000 of these chips out of the average 8350 base silicon. Four out of each ten 8350 have the ability to reach 5.0GHz, even less of them are able to do 5.0GHz with 1.5v or less.
This chips exists for one itching and one thing only, its the 3970be version for extreme fanboys, hell the 3970x is for enthusiast or professionals not for fanboy so this is the ultimate fanboy product and honestly and hanging who buys it is a moron/stupid fanboy. it cost less to buy several 8350s And see which ones can get 5ghz Why would you even need 5ghz overclock, that jus really stupid because the motherboard will will be charged and break in like a year.
Thanks, I didn't think it cost them that much to make these cpu work. Now I understand why it's price so high, but it also has me wondering if the investment is even worth it.
Yeah that's what i though when i saw the 5ghz. Pretty much any amd fx-8350 can reach 4.6ghz at minimum, so is the extra 400mhz worth the extra $500? To me it's not, then again someone will be buying these cpu's.
Do NOT get an FX 9590, it is just a binned 8350 with some really lesser changes. I do really love AMD products, but on the high end range, Intel knows its stuff.
If you can get 5GHz and its stable with power saving features enabled, it's not going to destroy your motherboard dude. I've got 4.8GHz on mine and the CPU idles at 2107 MHz. The VRM and NB heatsinks on my motherboard are just barely above room temperature at idle.
Actually if we want to get technical the 3820, 3930k, 3960x, and 3970x are all just binned lazer cut 8 core Xenon Silicon. The 3970x are the cream of the crop silicon that could be up-clocked to 3.5 GHz from the factory.
There's no such thing as a 3920k
All these extreme CPU's arecompletely pointless, Intel and AMD are being stupid. X79 is overkill and so is the 9590. The price is so absurd that you'll never really get the value of the chip. 3930k vs 4770k is a great example with Intel. The performance is so close that 1 iteration kind of negated the need for an extreme chip. Same with AMD's stupid FX-9590, i don't understand wtf these guys are thinking. Nobody is going t oseriously buy these chips unless their ignorant rich people or their being given the chips. I have built at least 150 computers in my life and i have yet to see someone buying an extreme chip because it was worth it for them. It was always as an enthusiast or fanboy thing, and when that comes to play it's never logical. Quad channel is ridiculous, extra sata ports is pointless, overkill on everything that you don't need. I know there are server and workstation people out there but that is a very specific thing then. For the general consumer, it's just an idiotic idea. Do general consumers buy Xeon 16 core chips....probably not, unless you are going to run a beast computer to run servers, hacking, etc. That's why Xeon's aren't sold in most computer stores.
If you really need extreme high end performance, buy a Xeon 8 core, but 99% of people who build their computers would be fine with a plain z series i7 or i5, or an 8350
I can see if someone needs the extra x16 lanes to justify a 3820 or 3930k, but the vast makority of people dont need that
Edited, I was tired and it was 4 AM in the morning. Regardless the i7 LGA2011 CPUs are merely lazer cut 8-core Xenon chips that performed better than they expected so they cut 2 cores off it and programmed the clock speed higher.
Well I agree with most of what you said, but intel 6 core cpu's do have their place in the market. There quite a bit of professional applications that can make good use of 6 cores. Intel does charge a lot for those cpu's but it's not like there are better options out there. Look at how AMD is trying to compete for example. I think AMD new cpu will trick a lot of people who aren't computer smart. They will see the 5ghz and think it's the best thing out there. Xeon's aren't really meant for anything besides workstation and servers most stores don't carry them cause the market isn't big enough to sell them. Most companies order their parts to save some money.