FX9590 vs i7 5820K
Tags:
- 5820k
- Intel i7
-
Gaming
-
Build Your Own
- PC gaming
- r9295x2
-
AMD
- ddr4
- r9 295x2
- Build
-
Components
- fx9590
- New Build
Last response: in Components
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 11:25:02 AM
I'd like to start planning a new gaming PC. This will be my second Build. I'm not worried about the money so much but I'd like the extra money on the i7 build to pay off in terms of being able to expand the system in the future for better performance. If it won't really pay off that way I'd like to know but I don't have a good enough knowledge of CPU and GPU technology to tell the difference. I'm getting better but not quite there, I've only been studying here and there for about 6 months.
Display:
Epson - PowerLite Home Cinema 2030 2D/3D 1080p 3LCD Projector
Model # HC2030 - V11H561020
Native Resolution: 1080p (1920 x 1080)
Input Signal: HDMI - TMDS
Video Compatibility:
2D: WXGA 60Hz, WXGA, SXGA, XGA, SVGA, VGA
3D: 720p 50/60Hz, 1080i 50/60Hz, 1080p 50/60/24Hz
or
JVC - D-ILA 4K Projector
Model # DLAX500R (excepts 4k resolution over HDMI but only does simulated 4k using their 4K e-Shift3 tech) true resolution 3840 X 2160
Video Input Signal Format:
480p, 576p, 720p 60/50, 1080i 60/50, 1080p 60/50/24, 3840x2160p 60/50/24, 4096x2160p 24
PC Input Signal Format (HDMI):
VGA/SVGA/XGA/WXGA/FWXGA/WXGA+/SXGA/WXGA++/WSXGA+/WUXGA
Considering 2 CPU options and accompanying hardware:
1. AMD FX
Case - Aerocool StrikeX Air open case (relevant because of the cooling needs, it's an open air case)
CPU - AMD FX950 (comes with water cooled solution and overclocked out of the box)
MOBO - ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z
Memory - CORSAIR Dominator Platinum 32GB (4 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2400
GPU - ASUS R9 295X2
SSD: SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE1T0BW 2.5" 1TB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive Sustained Sequential Read: 540MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: 520MBps
4KB Random Read: Up to 98,000 IOPS
4KB Random Write: Up to 90,000 IOPS
MTBF: 1,500,000 hours
Power Supply: Rosewill LIGHTNING-1300 1300W Continuous @ 50°C, Intel Haswell Ready, 80 PLUS GOLD, ATX12V v2.31 & EPS12V v2.92, SLI/CrossFire Ready, Modular Active PFC Power Supply
Operating System: Windows 8.1
2. Intel
Case - Aerocool StrikeX Air open case (relevant because of the cooling needs, it's an open air case)
CPU - i7 5820K Haswell-E (does not include any type of cooling solution and not overclocked, I have no experience OC'ing)
MOBO - ASUS RAMPAGE V EXTREME LGA 2011-v3 Intel X99
Memory - CORSAIR Dominator Platinum 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 2666 (PC4-21300) Model CMD32GX4M4A2666C16 (I really only want 16gb in 8gb X 2 config but it doesn't seem CORSAIR is making that yet)
GPU - ASUS R9 295X2
SSD: SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE1T0BW 2.5" 1TB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive Sustained Sequential Read: 540MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: 520MBps
4KB Random Read: Up to 98,000 IOPS
4KB Random Write: Up to 90,000 IOPS
MTBF: 1,500,000 hours
Power Supply: Rosewill LIGHTNING-1300 1300W Continuous @ 50°C, Intel Haswell Ready, 80 PLUS GOLD, ATX12V v2.31 & EPS12V v2.92, SLI/CrossFire Ready, Modular Active PFC Power Supply
Operating System: Windows 8.1
My biggest priority is how good the graphics look. If I go with the Epson it will only be used for a year or two before switching over to a true 4k 60hz projector.
Specific questions:
1. Will the i7 require overclocking? I might get into it but I'm leery of getting something I have to overclock to get what I want as I have no experience in this.
2. Will the CPU make a difference considering games are so GPU driven now?
3. Will the i7 require extra cooling as it doesn't even come with a heatsink or radiator fan combo?
4. The JVC says it will accept a 4k signal, but I can't tell whether it's at 30hz or 60hz. Does anyone know that's looked into this model?
Display:
Epson - PowerLite Home Cinema 2030 2D/3D 1080p 3LCD Projector
Model # HC2030 - V11H561020
Native Resolution: 1080p (1920 x 1080)
Input Signal: HDMI - TMDS
Video Compatibility:
2D: WXGA 60Hz, WXGA, SXGA, XGA, SVGA, VGA
3D: 720p 50/60Hz, 1080i 50/60Hz, 1080p 50/60/24Hz
or
JVC - D-ILA 4K Projector
Model # DLAX500R (excepts 4k resolution over HDMI but only does simulated 4k using their 4K e-Shift3 tech) true resolution 3840 X 2160
Video Input Signal Format:
480p, 576p, 720p 60/50, 1080i 60/50, 1080p 60/50/24, 3840x2160p 60/50/24, 4096x2160p 24
PC Input Signal Format (HDMI):
VGA/SVGA/XGA/WXGA/FWXGA/WXGA+/SXGA/WXGA++/WSXGA+/WUXGA
Considering 2 CPU options and accompanying hardware:
1. AMD FX
Case - Aerocool StrikeX Air open case (relevant because of the cooling needs, it's an open air case)
CPU - AMD FX950 (comes with water cooled solution and overclocked out of the box)
MOBO - ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z
Memory - CORSAIR Dominator Platinum 32GB (4 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2400
GPU - ASUS R9 295X2
SSD: SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE1T0BW 2.5" 1TB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive Sustained Sequential Read: 540MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: 520MBps
4KB Random Read: Up to 98,000 IOPS
4KB Random Write: Up to 90,000 IOPS
MTBF: 1,500,000 hours
Power Supply: Rosewill LIGHTNING-1300 1300W Continuous @ 50°C, Intel Haswell Ready, 80 PLUS GOLD, ATX12V v2.31 & EPS12V v2.92, SLI/CrossFire Ready, Modular Active PFC Power Supply
Operating System: Windows 8.1
2. Intel
Case - Aerocool StrikeX Air open case (relevant because of the cooling needs, it's an open air case)
CPU - i7 5820K Haswell-E (does not include any type of cooling solution and not overclocked, I have no experience OC'ing)
MOBO - ASUS RAMPAGE V EXTREME LGA 2011-v3 Intel X99
Memory - CORSAIR Dominator Platinum 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 2666 (PC4-21300) Model CMD32GX4M4A2666C16 (I really only want 16gb in 8gb X 2 config but it doesn't seem CORSAIR is making that yet)
GPU - ASUS R9 295X2
SSD: SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE1T0BW 2.5" 1TB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive Sustained Sequential Read: 540MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: 520MBps
4KB Random Read: Up to 98,000 IOPS
4KB Random Write: Up to 90,000 IOPS
MTBF: 1,500,000 hours
Power Supply: Rosewill LIGHTNING-1300 1300W Continuous @ 50°C, Intel Haswell Ready, 80 PLUS GOLD, ATX12V v2.31 & EPS12V v2.92, SLI/CrossFire Ready, Modular Active PFC Power Supply
Operating System: Windows 8.1
My biggest priority is how good the graphics look. If I go with the Epson it will only be used for a year or two before switching over to a true 4k 60hz projector.
Specific questions:
1. Will the i7 require overclocking? I might get into it but I'm leery of getting something I have to overclock to get what I want as I have no experience in this.
2. Will the CPU make a difference considering games are so GPU driven now?
3. Will the i7 require extra cooling as it doesn't even come with a heatsink or radiator fan combo?
4. The JVC says it will accept a 4k signal, but I can't tell whether it's at 30hz or 60hz. Does anyone know that's looked into this model?
More about : fx9590 5820k
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
This is almost funny.
While the i7 can be overclocked it doesn't need it. The AMD CPU is at best on the level of performance of a $200 Intel Core i5. You have so much more performance than it does in the Intel 5820k its not even funny.
Yes the i7 will make a huge improvement in games over the AMD CPU.
Yes you will need a cooler, but there are several for around $30 that will do an excellent job.
The JVC display takes a true 4096x2180 resolution signal at only 24Hz. The lower 2180p resolution setting can do 30Hz, but it cannot go any hhigher than that.
While the i7 can be overclocked it doesn't need it. The AMD CPU is at best on the level of performance of a $200 Intel Core i5. You have so much more performance than it does in the Intel 5820k its not even funny.
Yes the i7 will make a huge improvement in games over the AMD CPU.
Yes you will need a cooler, but there are several for around $30 that will do an excellent job.
The JVC display takes a true 4096x2180 resolution signal at only 24Hz. The lower 2180p resolution setting can do 30Hz, but it cannot go any hhigher than that.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
0
l
Sean P
September 27, 2014 11:37:48 AM
i'd prefer the AMD cpu. althoug the intel could possibly overclock more, and has a higher frequency, the amd cpu has 8 cores. personally, i like lower frequencies and more cores. AND you can OC the amd cpu up to 5 GHz if you really dare. and plus the intel is ery expensive.
since the amd is 4.7 GHz, it is possible to OC to even more than 5. 5.2 maybe.
the intel is just ovepriced for a 6 core.
since the amd is 4.7 GHz, it is possible to OC to even more than 5. 5.2 maybe.
the intel is just ovepriced for a 6 core.
-
Reply to Sean P
m
1
l
Related resources
- i7 5820k vs 5930k - Tech Support
- I7 4790K vs i7 5820K: worth the wait and extra cost? - Tech Support
- i7 5820k vs i7 5930k gaming - Tech Support
- just Gamming i7 4790k vs i7 5820k (forget the money) just wich?! - Tech Support
- I7 4790K vs i7 5820K - Tech Support
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 11:43:32 AM
IInuyasha74 said:
This is almost funny.While the i7 can be overclocked it doesn't need it. The AMD CPU is at best on the level of performance of a $200 Intel Core i5. You have so much more performance than it does in the Intel 5820k its not even funny.
Yes the i7 will make a huge improvement in games over the AMD CPU.
Yes you will need a cooler, but there are several for around $30 that will do an excellent job.
The JVC display takes a true 4096x2180 resolution signal at only 24Hz. The lower 2180p resolution setting can do 30Hz, but it cannot go any hhigher than that.
Yes, unfortunately I've got more money than knowledge when it comes to this stuff. I'm trying to get there tho.
So is your advice to go with the Epson and wait till the 4k 60hz projo's come down to a reasonable price?
Where does the performance of the i7 help for most gaming? Frame rate? Textures? Physics?
Thank you for the help!
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
m
0
l
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 11:45:46 AM
Sean P said:
i'd prefer the AMD cpu. althoug the intel could possibly overclock more, and has a higher frequency, the amd cpu has 8 cores. personally, i like lower frequencies and more cores. AND you can OC the amd cpu up to 5 GHz if you really dare. and plus the intel is ery expensive. since the amd is 4.7 GHz, it is possible to OC to even more than 5. 5.2 maybe.
the intel is just ovepriced for a 6 core.
Thank you! What is the best way to learn how to overclock? I don't even know where to start. There's of course stuff on youtube but most of it seems to assume you already know the basics.
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
m
0
l
Sean P
September 27, 2014 11:46:53 AM
umm, the vest way to overclock (most efficient) is going into BIOS. But for me, BIOS is scary xD my friend almost blew out his 8 core i7 and nvidia gtx 770 in bios. there are some programs for overclocking processor and your graphics card. For your graphics card, just look up "msi afterburner". I can make a mediafire link to msi afterburner, and msi kombuster(kombuster is just a directX benchmark to test the OC settings to make sure you dont blow out your GPU when its under heavy load)
I'm not neccisarily sure on overclocking for your processor, it depends on your processor. If it is an AMD CPU, AMD overdrive is a handy tool that's embedded into the AMD catalyst control center.
For intel processors, it may be a bit tricky since intel doesn't give a crap about their users and only want their money; half of their overclocking software is outdated. Intel desktop control center was last updated around 2009, and windows 7 is the most modern OS it supports. Intel Xtreme Tuning Utility works too!
(the following about OC'ing from BIOS is my personal knowledge. If you do not want to take my advice, I would strongly recommend looking it up for your certain mobo and BIOS revision)
But if you are comfortable with what type of motherboard you have and what type of BIOS it has, manually overclocking the CPU is your best bet at OC'ing your AMD fx to 5.0 GHz. But if you do use BIOS, remember to either A: Change the bus speed to overclock your whole system, B: Change your processor's voltage amount(requires a pretty hefty PSU) so your processor can handle heating up a lot more and take however amount of power it wants(but remember, the amd FX 9590 was released 4 years ago, it is an electricity-eating vampire when it comes to gaming and is quite inefficient but is still cheaper; paying a little more on your power bill every once in a while, or paying a few hundred dollars straight up for an intel?) C: google it.
Now, if you have the AMD FX 9590, like I said, that thing heats up like a *****. You should get a nice mid tower or full tower and have liquid cooling to quench the processor's high demand. ABSOLUTELY NO M-ATX CASES FOR THIS CPU! That case will be too small for this processor, and will overheat super fast.
But, frequency isn't everything; it is simply the clock speed. The amount of flops the processor puts out is what matters. Intel usually has more flops per processor, and the intel i7 has ~76.8 GFLOPS. The AMD, on the other hand, has ~52.5 GFLOPS. So the efficiency goes to the intel i7, but the raw power goes to the 9590.
I hope this bit of info helped
I'm more of an AMD guy, so I'm sorry for not having that much information on intel's processor overclocking.
I'm not neccisarily sure on overclocking for your processor, it depends on your processor. If it is an AMD CPU, AMD overdrive is a handy tool that's embedded into the AMD catalyst control center.
For intel processors, it may be a bit tricky since intel doesn't give a crap about their users and only want their money; half of their overclocking software is outdated. Intel desktop control center was last updated around 2009, and windows 7 is the most modern OS it supports. Intel Xtreme Tuning Utility works too!
(the following about OC'ing from BIOS is my personal knowledge. If you do not want to take my advice, I would strongly recommend looking it up for your certain mobo and BIOS revision)
But if you are comfortable with what type of motherboard you have and what type of BIOS it has, manually overclocking the CPU is your best bet at OC'ing your AMD fx to 5.0 GHz. But if you do use BIOS, remember to either A: Change the bus speed to overclock your whole system, B: Change your processor's voltage amount(requires a pretty hefty PSU) so your processor can handle heating up a lot more and take however amount of power it wants(but remember, the amd FX 9590 was released 4 years ago, it is an electricity-eating vampire when it comes to gaming and is quite inefficient but is still cheaper; paying a little more on your power bill every once in a while, or paying a few hundred dollars straight up for an intel?) C: google it.
Now, if you have the AMD FX 9590, like I said, that thing heats up like a *****. You should get a nice mid tower or full tower and have liquid cooling to quench the processor's high demand. ABSOLUTELY NO M-ATX CASES FOR THIS CPU! That case will be too small for this processor, and will overheat super fast.
But, frequency isn't everything; it is simply the clock speed. The amount of flops the processor puts out is what matters. Intel usually has more flops per processor, and the intel i7 has ~76.8 GFLOPS. The AMD, on the other hand, has ~52.5 GFLOPS. So the efficiency goes to the intel i7, but the raw power goes to the 9590.
I hope this bit of info helped
I'm more of an AMD guy, so I'm sorry for not having that much information on intel's processor overclocking.
-
Reply to Sean P
m
1
l
Wait wait wait hold up, you certainly don't want the AMD CPU. Please listen to me, I can back it up with countless links and reviews.
The AMD CPU isn't a real 8-core CPU. CPUs have several different parts inside of them, the two most basic parts are Integer Units and Floating Point Units, they are similar but handle different types of mathematical calculations. Each CPU core typically has one of each. Inside of the AMD CPU, they have 8 integer units, and only 4 floating point units. The result is that the AMD CPU is closer to the performance of only an 4-core CPU.
In addition to that the AMD CPU uses more power and produces more heat. It was created four years ago, and its wildly inefficient. Buying that instead would result in significant bottleneck in gaming and is an absolute terrible idea, and anyone telling you to go with the AMD on this instead of Intel has not done enough research.
If you want to save money, Intel has cheaper i7 motherboards, that use cheaper RAM and would save you a lot while still having much more performance than the AMD. I am contacting several top members of this site now to help persuade you otherwise so you don't make a huge mistake.
The AMD CPU isn't a real 8-core CPU. CPUs have several different parts inside of them, the two most basic parts are Integer Units and Floating Point Units, they are similar but handle different types of mathematical calculations. Each CPU core typically has one of each. Inside of the AMD CPU, they have 8 integer units, and only 4 floating point units. The result is that the AMD CPU is closer to the performance of only an 4-core CPU.
In addition to that the AMD CPU uses more power and produces more heat. It was created four years ago, and its wildly inefficient. Buying that instead would result in significant bottleneck in gaming and is an absolute terrible idea, and anyone telling you to go with the AMD on this instead of Intel has not done enough research.
If you want to save money, Intel has cheaper i7 motherboards, that use cheaper RAM and would save you a lot while still having much more performance than the AMD. I am contacting several top members of this site now to help persuade you otherwise so you don't make a huge mistake.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
1
l
Rybo
September 27, 2014 11:58:52 AM
If you're not worried about money, the i7 is for you
You can use DDR4 on the i7 on the 9590 you can't.
The 9590 eats power likes it candy, it's older, much older.
The i7 is new, has all the latest features, m.2, sata 10gb, DDr4.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
You can use DDR4 on the i7 on the 9590 you can't.
The 9590 eats power likes it candy, it's older, much older.
The i7 is new, has all the latest features, m.2, sata 10gb, DDr4.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
Please don't buy the 9590.
-
Reply to Rybo
m
1
l
Until others come to post more, here are a few articles and reviews you can look at to help you learn more about the Intel CPU you are currently looking at compared to the AMD CPU you are currently looking at.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8426/the-intel-haswell-e-...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8426/the-intel-haswell-e-...
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
1
l
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 12:05:14 PM
IInuyasha74 said:
Wait wait wait hold up, you certainly don't want the AMD CPU. Please listen to me, I can back it up with countless links and reviews.The AMD CPU isn't a real 8-core CPU. CPUs have several different parts inside of them, the two most basic parts are Integer Units and Floating Point Units, they are similar but handle different types of mathematical calculations. Each CPU core typically has one of each. Inside of the AMD CPU, they have 8 integer units, and only 4 floating point units. The result is that the AMD CPU is closer to the performance of only an 4-core CPU.
In addition to that the AMD CPU uses more power and produces more heat. It was created four years ago, and its wildly inefficient. Buying that instead would result in significant bottleneck in gaming and is an absolute terrible idea, and anyone telling you to go with the AMD on this instead of Intel has not done enough research.
If you want to save money, Intel has cheaper i7 motherboards, that use cheaper RAM and would save you a lot while still having much more performance than the AMD. I am contacting several top members of this site now to help persuade you otherwise so you don't make a huge mistake.
Wow, that's really good info. The stuff about how the cores work is particularly interesting. I really appreciate it!
I'm not doing this right away. The only thing I have purchased is the Strikex-Air case. (I'm a sucker for it looking badass, that's just about the only thing I won't budge on. Not a fanboy of anything, I only care about getting the best, brands mean nothing to me.) It's going in my fun area in the house with the theater. I've only just begun and plan to start purchasing components come Dec 14 through Mar 15. It hard to figure out what chips are on the way and when. Being the holidays are coming up I'm kind of thinking prices might go down and new products might arrive.
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
m
0
l
Francisco Costa said:
Sean P do you even CPU bro? The 5820K is much much better than the 9590, OP listen to IInuyasha74 please he already told you everything you needThank you and Rybo for the support. I contacted others to look here too. Honestly with this much going into it I was worried that he might listen to Sean P and make a very expensive mistake.
LGA 1150 might be a better choice if he needs to save money, since the RAM would be $300 cheaper to get DDR3 over DDR4, but AMD is certainly not a consideration.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
0
l
Sean P
September 27, 2014 12:09:45 PM
IInuyasha74 said:
Wait wait wait hold up, you certainly don't want the AMD CPU. Please listen to me, I can back it up with countless links and reviews.The AMD CPU isn't a real 8-core CPU. CPUs have several different parts inside of them, the two most basic parts are Integer Units and Floating Point Units, they are similar but handle different types of mathematical calculations. Each CPU core typically has one of each. Inside of the AMD CPU, they have 8 integer units, and only 4 floating point units. The result is that the AMD CPU is closer to the performance of only an 4-core CPU.
In addition to that the AMD CPU uses more power and produces more heat. It was created four years ago, and its wildly inefficient. Buying that instead would result in significant bottleneck in gaming and is an absolute terrible idea, and anyone telling you to go with the AMD on this instead of Intel has not done enough research.
If you want to save money, Intel has cheaper i7 motherboards, that use cheaper RAM and would save you a lot while still having much more performance than the AMD. I am contacting several top members of this site now to help persuade you otherwise so you don't make a huge mistake.
that is true, i even put that info on my reply before i read yours xD but the only reason i go with the AMD is price and frequency. 5.0 GHz is wild fast, and it's almost the same price as an i5. the amount of GFLOPS isn't too far behind either.
-
Reply to Sean P
m
0
l
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 12:14:22 PM
Basically the way I am looking at things is that I will build a system and probably leave it the way it is for at least 2yrs before upgrading any components (is that reasonable?) I'm open to the idea of upgrading small things as they become necessary ie, get 4gb of ddr4 because nothing will be using more than that over the next year, that sort of thing. I don't want to skimp on something I could benefit from today on soon because of a few duckets. So if I spend $200 to $400 on something extra it won't mean much to me when I think about it over time. But on the other hand if I forgo something because of cost I'll regret it every time I fire it up. And since it's so expensive that might be a while.
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
m
0
l
nbny2grnvl said:
Wow, that's really good info. The stuff about how the cores work is particularly interesting. I really appreciate it!
I'm not doing this right away. The only thing I have purchased is the Strikex-Air case. (I'm a sucker for it looking badass, that's just about the only thing I won't budge on. Not a fanboy of anything, I only care about getting the best, brands mean nothing to me.) It's going in my fun area in the house with the theater. I've only just begun and plan to start purchasing components come Dec 14 through Mar 15. It hard to figure out what chips are on the way and when. Being the holidays are coming up I'm kind of thinking prices might go down and new products might arrive.
Glad you are looking everything over first, I am glad to help.
Several people on this site are fanboys, but I am not personally. It might seem otherwise cause I am pushing so hard against AMD right now, but honestly I love AMD. They have excellent performance for the price in some of their CPUs, but if you are looking to spend more than $500 on a computer they quickly become not an option. They are only competitive in low budget builds. That and their GPUs are pretty awesome.
That case looks like a pretty good one so that won't be an issue. As for parts, since you are buying so late it will come down really to price still. Chances are Intel will have its new CPUs called Broadwell out by that time, so if you are hoping to save a few hundred dollars it would be a good choice. If price is no issue, then you want to stay with the CPU you are already looking at.
Key things to watch for also are GPUs. The AMD R9 295x2 is a good card, but AMD is about to release new cards in the next few months and likely you will be better to buy either an Nvidia GTX 980 or whatever AMD names it's new card.
For RAM, if you stay with the i7-5820k and DDR4, watching the RAM is very important as it will probably lower in price some. However, you want to make sure you buy four physical sticks of RAM. You don't need more RAM than 16GB, but the CPU you are using has four "channels" for the RAM. A "channel" in this sense refers to the wire connections in the motherboard connecting the CPU to the RAM, each being 64 wires. However, a RAM stick can only connect to one of these. So if you have one stick of RAM inside the computer, you are only use one channel to connect. Two will use two channels, and so on.
Using four, you will use all four channels, with the effect being that four times as much data can be sent at a time, since four times as many wires are transfering information at a time. This is important.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
1
l
Sean P said:
that is true, i even put that info on my reply before i read yours xD but the only reason i go with the AMD is price and frequency. 5.0 GHz is wild fast, and it's almost the same price as an i5. the amount of GFLOPS isn't too far behind either.
Ahh well, that makes more sense, but if he is even looking at the price on the parts for the i7 system and not running away, he definitely has enough money to throw into it. On a budget build, it makes more sense, playing with this much money not so much.
Also, you should check out the FX 8XXX CPUs for budget builds also, because they tend to overclock to the performance of the FX 9XXX CPUs but they are cheaper, use less power, and have less heat. AMD was trying to get attention with its FX 9XXX CPUs, and it worked, but they are a bit of a wreck.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
0
l
Rybo
September 27, 2014 12:26:10 PM
I'm currently in similar shoes to you nbny2grnvl.
I was looking at FX processors for myself, obviously smaller 8320 and the fx 6300, and I was like wow these look good, cheap and alright performance. Then I looked at it, for the less $ I can get an LGA 1155 board and non overclock-able xeon 1230v2, and it would still perform better.
Amd just isn't with the times right now, there, to be honest falling behind. There fx cpus can be great but you're basically buying last gen hardware, in today's spec. There focused more on APU's.
Now lets look at it on your level, a CPU amd launched which is basically an fx 8350 Oced to shit with a higher power consumption.
The i7, brand new socket so it's bound to last awhile, DDr4 support, And the 5820k, isn't a 4790k just oced...
If you buy the AMD your theoretically buying an OCed 8350.
The specs are identical.
Details
FX 9590 vs 8350
Architecture x86-64 | x86-64
Threads 8 | 8
L2 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms | 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 | 1
(pulled from CPUBOSS)
I was looking at FX processors for myself, obviously smaller 8320 and the fx 6300, and I was like wow these look good, cheap and alright performance. Then I looked at it, for the less $ I can get an LGA 1155 board and non overclock-able xeon 1230v2, and it would still perform better.
Amd just isn't with the times right now, there, to be honest falling behind. There fx cpus can be great but you're basically buying last gen hardware, in today's spec. There focused more on APU's.
Now lets look at it on your level, a CPU amd launched which is basically an fx 8350 Oced to shit with a higher power consumption.
The i7, brand new socket so it's bound to last awhile, DDr4 support, And the 5820k, isn't a 4790k just oced...
If you buy the AMD your theoretically buying an OCed 8350.
The specs are identical.
Details
FX 9590 vs 8350
Architecture x86-64 | x86-64
Threads 8 | 8
L2 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms | 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 | 1
(pulled from CPUBOSS)
-
Reply to Rybo
m
0
l
nbny2grnvl
September 27, 2014 12:55:41 PM
IInuyasha74 said:
Sean P said:
that is true, i even put that info on my reply before i read yours xD but the only reason i go with the AMD is price and frequency. 5.0 GHz is wild fast, and it's almost the same price as an i5. the amount of GFLOPS isn't too far behind either.
Ahh well, that makes more sense, but if he is even looking at the price on the parts for the i7 system and not running away, he definitely has enough money to throw into it. On a budget build, it makes more sense, playing with this much money not so much.
Also, you should check out the FX 8XXX CPUs for budget builds also, because they tend to overclock to the performance of the FX 9XXX CPUs but they are cheaper, use less power, and have less heat. AMD was trying to get attention with its FX 9XXX CPUs, and it worked, but they are a bit of a wreck.
My first build was for my son and I wound up feeling like a spent in the wrong areas and I could have done way better. This what he wound up with
$130 Case NZXT Red Phantom 530
$162 CPU FX8320
$67 MOBO Asus - M5A78L-M/USB3 Desktop Motherboard (for some reason I thought I needed the HDMI out)
$153 XFX - Radeon R7 260 Double D Edition 2GB DDR5 PCI Express 3.0 Graphics Card
$67 3 fans with blue LED lightsNZXT200mm Case Fan BlackBlueFS200RBBLED
$125 240gb Crucial SSD
$120 8gb DDR3 2 X 4gb
$100 Windows 8.1
$924 total for PC parts
$300 Dell 26 in 1080P monitor
$125 for Razor gaming keyboard and mouse
If I download AMD catalyst for the XFX card the whole thing crashes and the only way to get it going again is to reinstall windows and wipe the whole thing. I can't get the case rigged up right to make the USB ports on the case active.
I want to do better this time and not go cheap where I shouldn't.
-
Reply to nbny2grnvl
m
0
l
Rybo said:
I'm currently in similar shoes to you nbny2grnvl.I was looking at FX processors for myself, obviously smaller 8320 and the fx 6300, and I was like wow these look good, cheap and alright performance. Then I looked at it, for the less $ I can get an LGA 1155 board and non overclock-able xeon 1230v2, and it would still perform better.
Amd just isn't with the times right now, there, to be honest falling behind. There fx cpus can be great but you're basically buying last gen hardware, in today's spec. There focused more on APU's.
Now lets look at it on your level, a CPU amd launched which is basically an fx 8350 Oced to shit with a higher power consumption.
The i7, brand new socket so it's bound to last awhile, DDr4 support, And the 5820k, isn't a 4790k just oced...
If you buy the AMD your theoretically buying an OCed 8350.
The specs are identical.
Details
FX 9590 vs 8350
Architecture x86-64 | x86-64
Threads 8 | 8
L2 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB | 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms | 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 | 1
(pulled from CPUBOSS)
Yes this is a good point too. People shopping on a super tight budget and don't want to buy used can get the FX 6 and 8 core CPUs sometimes on excellent deals, but used LGA 1155 chips which aren't really that old and in fact need very little to match or beat Haswell parts if they are Ivy Bridge, are available cheap and give excellent performance. There APUs, especially the cheaper A10-6800k is amazing performance for the price since it can play games on medium settings usually for only about $110 and a $50 motherboard, but anything that isn't tight budget dictates Intel now. Hopefully that will change with their new architecture.
nbny2grnvl: As for the build for your son, yes you could of in some ways. Again here an Intel i5 would of been a better pick, and the monitor probably would of been better to buy a cheaper one, as there are excellent ones for about $200 and that extra $100 would of greatly increased the graphics card power.
Sorry to hear you have trouble with it, I would recommend a separate thread to get help with it so we keep things organized. Then we can help you with that without mixing information.
-
Reply to IInuyasha74
m
0
l
Put simply, the 9590 get's beat by a 4770K or 4790K at their stock freq - that was a good reason why AMD didn't send send out ANY of these CPUs for review, and remember they released them at over 2 1/2 times the price of a 4770K....Once a few people broke down and bought these for review, they showed the stock 4770K beat them in basically everything, and with a slight OC the 4770K ran away from them. The 4790K is even better, and when you look at 6 or 8 core 2011 CPUs it's laughable to compare a 9590 to them
-
Reply to Tradesman1
m
0
l
Benchmarks - AMD vs Intel high end - http://www.anandtech.com/show/8426/the-intel-haswell-e-...
9590 vs older 4 core i7 - http://cpuboss.com/cpu/AMD-FX-9590
9590 - 220W. Intel 85 to 140W.
Intel beats AMD by 30%
i7 5820 - $390 at Newegg
fx9590 - $260 at Newegg
The FX9590 gets so hot it throttles back - http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
9590 vs older 4 core i7 - http://cpuboss.com/cpu/AMD-FX-9590
9590 - 220W. Intel 85 to 140W.
Intel beats AMD by 30%
i7 5820 - $390 at Newegg
fx9590 - $260 at Newegg
The FX9590 gets so hot it throttles back - http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
-
Reply to i7Baby
m
1
l
Rybo
September 27, 2014 3:26:20 PM
ccampy
September 28, 2014 1:38:12 AM
Sean P
September 28, 2014 7:35:29 PM
-
Reply to Sean P
m
0
l
Sean P
September 28, 2014 7:37:00 PM
-
Reply to Sean P
m
0
l
Related resources
- i7 5820k vs 4790k solution
- i7 5820K vs 5930K: reduced PCI lanes? so is 4-way sli supported? solution
- SolvedIntel i7 4930k (Ivy-Bridge) vs. AMD FX-9590 processor for Video Encoding solution
- Solvedi7 4770K VS. FX-9590 solution
- SolvedIntel Core i7 4770 vs amd fx-9590 solution
- Solvedfx-9590 vs i7 4770k solution
- SolvedOverclocked i7 5820k questions solution
- SolvedIntel Core i7 5820K Questions. solution
- Solved630 Watt PSU enough to hold a i7 5820k + GTX 780? solution
- SolvedIntel i7 3930k or a intel 5820k? solution
- Solved5820k vs 4790k solution
- Solved5820k vs 4790k solution
- I7 5820k or I7 4790k solution
- Over clocking i7 5820k rampage solution
- I7 5820k or i7 4790k for gaming in the next 3-4 years? solution
- More resources
Read discussions in other Components categories
!