AMD FX-9590 Review
| Category | Desktop | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
|---|---|---|
| Target | high-end | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Socket Compatibility | AM3+ | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Integrated Graphics | None | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Cooler Included | No | ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overclock Potential | 1 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Year | 2013 Model | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Price | 495.92 USD | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Number of Cores | 8 Cores | ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ |
| Number of Threads | 8 Threads | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Core Frequency | 4.7 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Boost Frequency | 5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Max Stable Overclock | 5 GHz | ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ |
| Power Consumption | 220 W | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Manufacturing Process | 32 nm | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Maximum Supported Memory | 32 GB | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Price-Value Score | 58 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Speed Score | 64 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Productivity Score | 43 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Gaming Score | 73 % | ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1080p Bottleneck | 51.3 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 1440p Bottleneck | 25.6 % | ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Max 4K Bottleneck | 12.8 % | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
| Overall Score | 37/100 | ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ |
The FX-9590 is one of AMD's high-end Desktop processors. It was released in 2013 with 8 cores and 8 threads. With base clock at 4.7GHz, max speed at 5GHz, and a 220W power rating. The FX-9590 is based on the Vishera 32nm family and is part of the FX series.
Increased IPC improvements, along with the massive turbo boost of 5GHz mean that even in single core performance – long a weak link of AMD’s processors – comes within reaching distance of rival chips.
As the higher-priced version of the FX-9370, the FX-9590 has higher base and Boost frequencies of 4.7 and 5 GHz, respectively. That's an increase in base frequency and a bump to boost clocks, but the real advantage should lay in the higher Package Power Tracking (PPT) envelope, which is a measurement of the maximum amount of power delivered to the socket. The FX-9370's PPT tops out at 220W, while the motherboard can pump up to 142W to the FX-9590 at peak performance. That opens up much more aggressive boost behavior, on both single and multiple cores, that could widen the performance gap beyond what we see on the spec sheet.
Value seekers who aren't afraid to press the Precision Boost Overdrive button and have sufficient cooling should look to the FX-9370 for roughly equivalent performance to the FX-9590, particularly if gaming factors heavily into the buying decision. That could save you money, reinforcing our decision to give the FX-9370 an Editor's Choice award.
What this all means is that the AMD FX-9590 is an absolute beast when it comes to multi-threaded workloads, especially at this price point. If you're counting on doing some video editing or compiling one hell of an Excel spreadsheet, you're going to see firsthand a performance boost with the FX-9590.
If extended overclocking and boost frequencies are trivial matters to you, AMD also offers the FX-9370 at $594.55. It’s still outfitted with 8-cores and 8-threads, but clocks in at a slower 4.4GHz and maxes out at only 4.7GHz.
The FX-9590 clocks up to 5Ghz just as it promises on the box, and with AMD’s software you can take one of the cores all the way up to 5.1GHz. However, don’t expect to get much beyond that without seriously upgrading your cooling solution and manually tweaking voltages behind the operating system level.
That said, to squeeze out all the potential of this surprisingly potent high-end chip, you’ll want (and need) to splurge on an enthusiast-grade A78, NVIDIA GeForce 7025, NVIDIA GeForce 7025 / nForce 630a motherboard.
Which GPU to Pick for AMD FX-9590
Below is a comparison of all graphics cards average FPS performance (using an average of 80+ games at ultra quality settings), combined with the AMD FX-9590.
| Graphics Card | Price | Cost Per Frame | Avg 1080p | Avg 1440p | Avg 4K |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 24GB | $ 1,599 | $ 8.3 | 192.7 FPS
|
225.3 FPS
|
167.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 4.4 | 179.8 FPS
|
210.2 FPS
|
156.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24GB | $ 999 | $ 5.7 | 173.9 FPS
|
199.6 FPS
|
135 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB | $ 1,199 | $ 7.2 | 167 FPS
|
195.1 FPS
|
144.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 12GB | $ 799 | $ 5 | 160.4 FPS
|
187.4 FPS
|
139.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT 20GB | $ 899 | $ 5.7 | 158.1 FPS
|
181.5 FPS
|
122.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 24GB | $ 1,499 | $ 10 | 150.1 FPS
|
169.2 FPS
|
118.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT 16GB | $ 1,099 | $ 7.6 | 143.7 FPS
|
164.9 FPS
|
111.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB | $ 1,999 | $ 14.1 | 141.3 FPS
|
165.1 FPS
|
122.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 16GB | $ 999 | $ 7.1 | 140.7 FPS
|
159.5 FPS
|
109.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 16GB | $ 649 | $ 4.9 | 132.5 FPS
|
150.2 FPS
|
103.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 20GB | $ 799 | $ 6.1 | 130.8 FPS
|
150.5 FPS
|
109.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 10GB | $ 699 | $ 5.3 | 130.8 FPS
|
147.5 FPS
|
103.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 12GB | $ 599 | $ 4.7 | 126.3 FPS
|
143.9 FPS
|
105.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti 10GB | $ 599 | $ 5.3 | 112.2 FPS
|
127.6 FPS
|
90.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6800 16GB | $ 579 | $ 5.5 | 104.9 FPS
|
119 FPS
|
81.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 5 | 100.1 FPS
|
112.8 FPS
|
78.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB | $ 2,499 | $ 27.2 | 91.9 FPS
|
107 FPS
|
75.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | $ 1,299 | $ 14.5 | 89.4 FPS
|
104.2 FPS
|
73.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 12GB | $ 479 | $ 5.4 | 88.3 FPS
|
100.9 FPS
|
68.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.6 | 86.8 FPS
|
100.3 FPS
|
72.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8GB | $ 399 | $ 4.9 | 82 FPS
|
94.9 FPS
|
67.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB | $ 699 | $ 8.6 | 81.2 FPS
|
93.6 FPS
|
65.5 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.1 | 78.3 FPS
|
89.9 FPS
|
62.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN V 12GB | $ 2,999 | $ 38.5 | 77.8 FPS
|
90.6 FPS
|
65 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 8GB | $ 299 | $ 3.8 | 77.8 FPS
|
90.3 FPS
|
65 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 7600 8GB | $ 269 | $ 3.5 | 77.7 FPS
|
89.3 FPS
|
61.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB | $ 699 | $ 9.1 | 76.7 FPS
|
87.5 FPS
|
60.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB | $ 379 | $ 5.2 | 73.5 FPS
|
83.9 FPS
|
57.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | $ 759 | $ 10.6 | 71.9 FPS
|
83.5 FPS
|
58.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER 8GB | $ 499 | $ 7 | 71.5 FPS
|
80.6 FPS
|
56.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA TITAN Xp 12GB | $ 1,199 | $ 17 | 70.5 FPS
|
80.6 FPS
|
57.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon VII 16GB | $ 699 | $ 9.9 | 70.5 FPS
|
80 FPS
|
55 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB | $ 399 | $ 5.8 | 68.7 FPS
|
77.9 FPS
|
53.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 8GB | $ 499 | $ 7.4 | 67.7 FPS
|
75.3 FPS
|
53.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 8GB | $ 200 | $ 3 | 67.7 FPS
|
77.9 FPS
|
56.1 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 12GB | $ 329 | $ 4.9 | 67.3 FPS
|
76.1 FPS
|
53.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER 8GB | $ 400 | $ 6.2 | 64.1 FPS
|
70.1 FPS
|
48.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 8GB | $ 349 | $ 5.5 | 62.9 FPS
|
71.4 FPS
|
49 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB | $ 499 | $ 8.2 | 61.1 FPS
|
68.3 FPS
|
47 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB | $ 350 | $ 5.8 | 60.3 FPS
|
64.5 FPS
|
44 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB | $ 279 | $ 4.7 | 59.4 FPS
|
66.8 FPS
|
45.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 295X2 4GB | $ 1,499 | $ 26.2 | 57.2 FPS
|
63.1 FPS
|
46.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB | $ 499 | $ 8.7 | 57.1 FPS
|
64.8 FPS
|
44.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 8GB | $ 409 | $ 7.2 | 56.6 FPS
|
63.2 FPS
|
43.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti 6GB | $ 249 | $ 4.5 | 55.4 FPS
|
61.4 FPS
|
42.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB | $ 999 | $ 18.2 | 55 FPS
|
60.8 FPS
|
41.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB | $ 279 | $ 5.2 | 53.8 FPS
|
60.2 FPS
|
41.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB | $ 399 | $ 7.5 | 53.5 FPS
|
60.6 FPS
|
41.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB | $ 399 | $ 7.7 | 52.1 FPS
|
57.7 FPS
|
39.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER 6GB | $ 229 | $ 4.5 | 50.8 FPS
|
56.8 FPS
|
39 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB | $ 649 | $ 13.5 | 47.9 FPS
|
53.2 FPS
|
36.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 6GB | $ 220 | $ 4.6 | 47.8 FPS
|
53.4 FPS
|
36.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 590 8GB | $ 279 | $ 6.2 | 45.3 FPS
|
49.2 FPS
|
33 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB | $ 649 | $ 14.9 | 43.5 FPS
|
50.6 FPS
|
35.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 4GB | $ 160 | $ 3.8 | 41.6 FPS
|
46.4 FPS
|
31.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB 8GB | $ 199 | $ 4.8 | 41.2 FPS
|
44.7 FPS
|
29.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB | $ 549 | $ 13.4 | 41.1 FPS
|
45.1 FPS
|
31.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB | $ 229 | $ 5.7 | 40.2 FPS
|
43.6 FPS
|
29.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB | $ 649 | $ 16.4 | 39.6 FPS
|
45.2 FPS
|
31.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK 6GB | $ 999 | $ 26 | 38.4 FPS
|
41.8 FPS
|
30.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 FURY 4GB | $ 549 | $ 14.7 | 37.4 FPS
|
42.6 FPS
|
29.5 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB 6GB | $ 254 | $ 6.8 | 37.3 FPS
|
40.8 FPS
|
28 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB 4GB | $ 169 | $ 4.6 | 37 FPS
|
40.2 FPS
|
26.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390X 8GB | $ 429 | $ 11.9 | 36 FPS
|
40.8 FPS
|
28.4 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB 3GB | $ 170 | $ 4.8 | 35.4 FPS
|
38.8 FPS
|
26.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 4GB | $ 329 | $ 9.5 | 34.8 FPS
|
37.7 FPS
|
26.9 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB | $ 400 | $ 11.8 | 33.8 FPS
|
38 FPS
|
26.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 390 8GB | $ 329 | $ 9.8 | 33.6 FPS
|
37.3 FPS
|
24.4 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB | $ 169 | $ 5.1 | 33.2 FPS
|
36.8 FPS
|
24.7 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 4GB | $ 149 | $ 4.7 | 31.7 FPS
|
35.1 FPS
|
24 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB | $ 179 | $ 6 | 29.6 FPS
|
33 FPS
|
22.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380X 4GB | $ 229 | $ 9.2 | 24.9 FPS
|
27.4 FPS
|
19.2 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 285 2GB | $ 249 | $ 11.2 | 22.3 FPS
|
24.7 FPS
|
16.3 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 380 2GB | $ 199 | $ 9 | 22.2 FPS
|
24.5 FPS
|
16.3 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB | $ 169 | $ 7.7 | 21.9 FPS
|
24.2 FPS
|
16.6 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R9 280 3GB | $ 279 | $ 12.9 | 21.6 FPS
|
24.1 FPS
|
15.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 2GB | $ 199 | $ 9.3 | 21.4 FPS
|
23.5 FPS
|
15.9 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 3GB | $ 169 | $ 9.1 | 18.6 FPS
|
20.4 FPS
|
13.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB | $ 99 | $ 5.8 | 17.2 FPS
|
18.7 FPS
|
12.6 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 2GB | $ 159 | $ 9.4 | 16.9 FPS
|
18.3 FPS
|
12.8 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 370 2GB | $ 149 | $ 9 | 16.6 FPS
|
17.2 FPS
|
12.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon R7 265 2GB | $ 149 | $ 9.1 | 16.4 FPS
|
16.6 FPS
|
11.7 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB | $ 140 | $ 9.2 | 15.2 FPS
|
16.5 FPS
|
11.2 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB | $ 149 | $ 10.1 | 14.7 FPS
|
14.2 FPS
|
10.1 FPS
|
| AMD Radeon RX 550 2GB | $ 79 | $ 6.6 | 12 FPS
|
13.1 FPS
|
8.8 FPS
|
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 2GB | $ 79 | $ 6.9 | 11.5 FPS
|
12.5 FPS
|
8.1 FPS
|
Related Discussions and Issues
So he builds a budget computer with a 9590 which takes enough power to give electricity to a small village and now he wants to cool it with a 110$ cooler?
Your brother is insane.
Also CLC 240 is fine, I'd go for h110i though. They are pretty much the same, just preference.
He didn't do any research beyond 9590 is 8 cores and therefore 4 times faster than the i3, and he is pretty young and just now old enough to work in the family business (18 for insurance purposes)
Though I do have an old x58 gigabyte tri channel ram board with a xeon in it that would run infinitely cooler on the 212 and be able to be overclocked and offered to trade him and he refused so maybe he is insane lol.
Edit: He is now trying to tell my his r7 260x is good enough for vr
Don't blow money on a CPU cooler unless the motherboard is good enough to actually handle the 9590 at or near full speed.
You don't need an AIO. Here, the TRUE Spirit 140 POWER if it fits in the case, rated for 360W TDP.
980ti + fx 9590 Bottleneck help
Hi there,I have a feeling that my current fx 8350 CPU is bottlenecking my GPU. The fx 9590 is the fastest CPU for my ddr3 am3+ motherboard. Any ideas on how I could find out if buying one and overclocking it would eliminate my GPU bottleneck? Also, I have an aftermarket single fan Coolermaster, would I need to upgrade to water cooling?
Thank you
Honestly Save your money and upgrade to a Ryzen 5 1600 and b350 mobo
AMD fx-9590 system needs upgrading help
I'm trying to get Escape From Tarkov running but having trouble getting over 30 fps even with everything off or low so thinking of upgrading something... I'm not positive on my budget but it's somewhere between 500 and 1000 dollars.
here are my specs:
-Sabertooth 990FX R3.0
-AMD FX-9590 (something I would bet not many people have lol)
-RTX 2060 Super
-2x8gb 933 MHz ddr3 memory (probably the problem)
-1000w psu (I know overkill)
what my ideas were:
-Buy faster ddr3 memory and pray. (cheaper but not sure if it would get me to where I'd like to be ie something like 100 fps gaming)
-Buy something like a ryzen chip with new motherboard and ddr4 ram.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated as I'm not quite sure what my best option is. I have done memory diagnostics and temp checks to make sure my performance problem isn't coming from that.
Quite a new game with quite old CPU and slow RAM. So my opinion is to lay the FX CPU to rest and go Ryzen. Just replace the CPU, Motherboard and RAM and you'll be gaming on the highest settings at 1080p in any game. The traditional combo is a ryzen 5 with a b450 motherboard and ddr4 between 3000 and 3600MHz. Should cost even less than 500$ if you choose budget parts since you already have a high-end graphics card.
Thanks for the advice this is just what I needed to hear. Was hoping to be able to tough it out with my FX as its quite novelty and I've had it for so long.
as an add-on question do you know if the ryzen 5 3600x is worth 40-50 extra dollars over a normal 3600 if I have some extra to spend?
I would replace the cpu (and therefore ram and mobo) as you suggested
Need Some help with an FX-9590
hey guys I need some help overclocking a fx-9590. I've also posted this in r/pcmasterrace where I usually lurk before I found this sub (I figured there's a better chance of finding someone with some experience overclocking a piledriver CPU here)
Here's what I have done:
I set up the manual bios profile with static voltages cool 'n quiet and turbo core off the works
-
CPU 4.7 Ghz, Multiplier 23.5, CPU Bus 200Mhz, NB 2200Mhz, HT 2200Mhz, Core 1.45v all default
Ran pime95 ~45min 37C stable? (individual cores drop to 1700Mhz and then go back to 4.7Ghz is this a problem?) It also completes fire-strike.
Bump up CPU bus by 5Mhz to 205 for ~4.8Ghz cpu speed and test with prime 95, test gets going fans speed up, the temps hit ~50C and the system freezes.
Seemed similar to memory issues I had in the past so I dropped the memory speed from 1866 to 1600Mhz and test again this time the computer shuts down completely at 50C. This looks like thermal throttling to me but as I said the core temp was only 50C (i'm using hwmonitor) and I was under the impression that FX CPUs can get to at least 62 C safely.
Dropped the settings back to stock and ran prime 95 again - still stable.
Bumped back up to 4.8Ghz and bumped the core voltage to 1.46v (maybe too small to make a difference?) and got the same results as in 4. Decided to consult Reddit before bumping up the core voltage any further. I read someplace that the maximum save Core voltage for the 9590 was 1.55V but I was unable to verify that If someone could point me to where I might find out more about that that would be helpful. Also if you see anything I'm doing incorrectly please let me know.
Specs:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant
Type Item Price CPU AMD FX-9590 4.7GHz 8-Core Processor Purchased For $260.00 CPU Cooler Cooler Master Seidon 120XL 86.2 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler Purchased For $0.00 Motherboard Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 ATX AM3+ Motherboard Purchased For $119.00 Memory G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1866 Memory Purchased For $114.00 Storage OCZ Trion 100 240GB 2.5" Solid State Drive Purchased For $65.00 Video Card EVGA GeForce GTX 970 4GB Superclocked ACX 2.0 Video Card Purchased For $327.00 Case Corsair Carbide Series 300R Windowed ATX Mid Tower Case $77.99 @ Amazon Power Supply Corsair RMx 850W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply $109.99 @ Amazon Monitor BenQ GL2760H 27.0" 1920x1080 60Hz Monitor Purchased For $169.99 Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts Total $1242.97 Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-01-22 20:49 EST-0500radiator is in push pull
PSU is high wattage because I originally planned to run SLI 970s and still wanted some headroom
Running windows 10 with the anniversary update
Edit: Before Posting I took a look at the wiki for AMD overclocking and some of the links for OC3D and I noticed a couple differences between what I have configured and what's in the posts I read. A. My motherboard defaulted to a HT Link speed of 2200Mhz when guides say default is 2600Mhz B. my CPU LLC is set to High when most others I've seen are set to Ultra High I did this because I wanted to try to be as safe as possible while overclocking as I saw that Jayztwocents (a youtuber) recently fried an FX-8350 while using similar settings (although I believe his Core was at 1.5v or so)
Basically I'm looking for some more information on what is safe to do with my CPU as well as tips on anything I might be doing wrong in this process. Thanks :)
Update:
Thanks for all the advice unfortunately I won't be able to work on it that much during the week I'll try to remember to update the post on Saturday if I've made any progress.
Your CPU speeds dropping under load is a sure sign that the VRMs are getting overworked or overheating. This is a pretty common issue on these CPUs since they like to consume lots of power. They are brutal on the VRMs.
Do you have any airflow over the VRM heatsink? Sometimes it's oversight when you have a solid CPU cooler or AIO but no airflow over them and they will get very hot, very quickly and lead to lots of instability issues.
Does your motherboard natively support the 220w CPUs?
I'm gonna try rearranging the aio / fans to get more airflow on the vrm heatsink ... As for 220w support I'm not sure if any of the boards that are compatible support 220W natively I believe most if not all of them required a bios update although mine is one of the ~6 boards that are supposed to work with the cpu
While the chip may not degrade significantly faster with over 1.5 volts, it increases motherboard's component stress by a lot. Your motherboard has solid VRM that can feed enough power to the CPU, but you must ensure it does not overheat or else it will throttle. At least it won't catch fire like MSI or ASRock amd boards could do. Probably the best thing to do is to attach a small fan (e.g. 80 mm often seen in the stock coolers) to blow air to the VRM heat sink.
The plan is to move my AIO to the top (maybe with better fans) and leave a 120 in the rear position to blow on the vrm
I wouldn't be suprised if your CPU cooler just isn't enough for all of that heat. Download AMD Overdrive and see what the thermal margin is, if its at 0C or below its your cooler that isn't enough.
The thermal margin is around 17C when I start seeing problems ... which puts it right about 50C like I was seeing with other programs
1.5V is really the absolute max limit you want to be hitting. Honestly, your chip probably isn't going to go higher than 4.7GHz. Remember that the 9xxx is already effectively an oc'd 8xxx series chip, so you don't really get much oc headroom with the 9xxx series range.
Yeah, thats a 6 phase board, so you're lucky if you can push fx9 on stock clocks.
This board can handle FX-9000 easily as long as the VRM is kept cool. Even though the VRM configuration is 6+2 phase, it's native and digitally controlled. For instance MSI and Gigabyte usually use doubled phases in their AMD mobos. Also Asus am3+ motherboards from M5A97 Evo upwards have good mosfets that support high currents. And wait, there is more: Asus safety mechanisms and BIOS options are also better than on many of its competitors, so one can tweak more settings and not have the motherboard fry.
the board is advertised as 6+2+2 phase can you explain why it as the extra +2 I see most of the other boards are either 6+2 or 8+2 or something like that... looking at the board I can see 8 of the power phase circuits by the cpu and two for the ram are two of the ones by the CPU for the chipset or something?
actually Asus claims this board supports this CPU with the following comment: "FX-9590(FD9590FHW8KHK, 4.7GHz, 8C, L3:8M, 220W,rev.C0,AM3+) Due to the high TDP, please be noted there are limitations while using this CPU(i.e. special thermal required..)"
Please note that phase number is not all that counts. The quality of the components does also count. Many 8+2 boards out there of other manufacturers are doubled 4+2 done wrong.
I've got the same motherboard as you, and recently ran a 9370. Just wasn't enough to do anything more than a touch over stock even with a really nice custom loop wc; the VRMs would get blazing hot and it would throttle like mad. I even mounted two small fans directly on the vrm heatsinks... which let it run a little longer before throttling :). Even at stock it would happen after a little while. Next time you get throttling, try something - touch the blue heatsink between your chip and the motherboard I/O plate... but do so carefully; I'm going to bet it will be SCORCHING hot :) Or at least, mine was.
In my experience, this mobo is good enough to generally run these high-tdp chips, but just barely - not enough to push the current up as much as you'd need for significant overclocking :(
I actually got enough throttling at stock that I gave up, sold off the 9370 and bought an 8370. Got a slight decrease in end-result clock speed (4.5 vs. 4.7), but the better efficiency of this chip means the VRMs are able to keep up better, so it rarely throttles anymore...
to be honest I generally just run the CPU at stock speed most of the time though :)
I tried running with my hand on the heatsink and it didn't seem to get too hot ... I may try bumping up the over current protection ... I believe it was only at 110% or so
The official maximum voltage is 1.5V (page 19). As far as the CPU is concerned you should be fine at 1.55V if you can keep temperatures to 40C.
However , that motherboard is decent but not amazing, and with a watercooler rather than a top-down air cooler the VRMs won't be getting much airflow. You could try putting some side fans in on your case and retrying the 4.7GHz setting, hopefully it'd reduce VRM temperatures and stop the dropping to 1.7GHz. The 9370 and 9590 are more than overclocked 8350s, they're binned for being higher leakage chips (=better ln2 results) so the power draw and therefore load on the motherboard will be higher. Asus notes on their website, in the compatibility list for that board , that "Due to the high TDP, please be noted there are limitations while using this CPU(i.e. special thermal required..)". Which is almost english but I think they're referring to not just a need for good CPU cooling but also good motherboard cooling.
Actually max vid is 1.55V. The value you mentioned is what they recommend max for air cooling.
Need help cooling an FX 9590
Hey guys, so basically i have fx 9590 which i'd like to use however my cooling is not adequate forcing me to upgrade.
Will the corsair h60 (2018) 120mm work? I will be undervolting the cpu as much as i can and i may underclock it to the low-end of 4Ghz
Intel Vs AMD: Which CPU is Best?
Jul 12, 2020 - A rivalry for the ages, and a question often asked and wondered about. Whenever you want to build or upgrade your PC, you have to make a decision: Buy an Intel or AMD processor?
Impact of RAM Size and Speed on Gaming Benchmarks
Jul 5, 2020 - Does RAM size and speed affect your gaming performance? should you invest in a high performance RAM kit? Find out here.
Who Is Lilith and What Terrifies Us About This Diablo Demon?
Jul 24, 2023 No evil entity is more scary than Lilith herself, shrouded in darkness.
Why You Should Always Buy a Mid-to-High-Range Gaming PC?
Jun 23, 2020 - Mid- and high-range builds perform very well for their price, and are better than the entry-level in terms of power, longevity, and reliability, and they offer more bang for your buck especially when looking at their price-by-year advantage.
Should you buy a Pre-Built PC or a Custom PC?
Jun 11, 2020 - Pre-built systems are an attractive option for those who are less concerned with the minute details of every component in their build. Building your own PC is the best solution for those who want full control over every aspect of their build. It provides the most thorough customization options, from the CPU to the fans and lighting.
How to use CPUAgent To Find The Right CPU
Jun 2, 2020 - How to find the Right CPU? Whether you’re building or upgrading a PC, the processor matters a lot. CPUAgent is the right tool to help you find and choose the right CPU for your needs.
RTX 3070 with 10600k vs 3700x Bottleneck Comparison
Sep 03, 2020 - Save your CPU money and invest it in a powerful GPU instead. So, which affordable yet powerfulrt CPU strikes the best performance-price balance with the NVIDIA RTX 3070?
10600K vs 3600X: Battle of the mid-range CPUs
May 23, 2020 - The best performance to price value mid-range cpus are here. Find out more in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i5-10600K vs Ryzen 5 3600X's capabilities.
10700K vs 3700X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 22, 2020 - Which one is worth it, Core i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X? Find out in this comprehensive review and summary of the Core i7-10700K vs Ryzen 7 3700X's capabilities.
13900K vs 3900X: Specs, 80+ Game Benchmarks, Bottleneck, and Streaming Analysis
May 21, 2020 - 10 cores vs 12 cores. Top-of-the-line very high-end cpus duke it out.
2500K vs 3570K vs 4670K vs 6600K vs 7600K vs 8600K vs 9600K vs 10600K: Should you consider upgrading?
May 21, 2020 - In this massive comparison across 8 generations of Intel Core i5 series CPUs, we explore the performance improvements by generation and whether it is reasonable or not to upgrade to Intel's latest.
[Build Help] Brother went and got a 9590 against my recommendation, what can he use to cool it with?
So a few years back my little brother was looking at building a budget gaming system. He had a small budget so I told him to go with an i3, 4gb ram (this was years ago) and an r7 260x. Well I end up moving out and get busy with living on my own for the first time so we don't really talk for about a year.
I come to my parents house for Christmas and he had gotten his PC bought for his birthday months ago and he assembled it with my dad. He also told me he had troubles with bsods when doing anything that uses lots of system resources. I open task manager just to see what was happening and I see that Instead of following my recommendation, he went and got an 9590 instead because he said 8 cores is better and he found a really good deal second hand. He did this without changing my recommendation for CPU cooler, so he now has a 212 Evo cooling his 9590, undervolted and underclocked of course.
He just got old enough to work at the family business and has saved enough money to get a new cooler. Would an EVGA CLC 240 be a good choice? Budget is 110.