Welcome Stranger to OCC!Login | Register

AMD FX-9590 & FX-9370 Review

   -   
» Discuss this article (45)

Lowest Prices

AMD FX-9590 & FX-9370 Testing:

Testing the latest FX series Vishera-based processors from AMD will involve running it and its comparison products through OCC's test suite of benchmarks, which include both synthetic benchmarks and real-world applications. The gaming tests will also consist of both synthetic benchmarks and actual gameplay, in which we can see if similarly-prepared setups offer any performance advantages. The system will receive a fully updated, fresh install of Windows 7 Professional 64-bit edition, in addition to the latest chipset drivers for each board and GeForce drivers for the NVIDIA GTX 770. To ensure as few variables as possible, all hardware will be tested at their stock speeds, timings, voltages, and latencies, unless otherwise stated. Turbo Boost will be disabled on all processors to make a fair comparison without skewing results. After stock speed testing, each processor will then be overclocked as much as possible, while still maintaining full stability.

 

Testing Setup: Intel (Socket 1150)

 

Testing Setup: AMD (Socket AM3+)

 

Overclocking:

Overclocked settings:

  • Processor: AMD FX-9590 5068MHz 202.7 x 25
  • Processor: AMD FX-9370 5016MHz 200.7 x 25

 

Overclocking this pair of processors meant that I was going to have to get my sea legs back with regards to how AMD hardware, specifically this architecture, overclocked. Thankfully that was a short voyage and the results were fairly easy to get, thanks to the ASUS Crosshair V Formula Z motherboard. Its features were familiar with what I was used to when working with Intel hardware and made the learning curve all that much quicker. Surprisingly, both chips ran within 50MHz of each other when overclocked using the Corsair H100i cooling solution. The FX-9590 was able to push up and over 5050MHz by tweaking the reference clock from 200MHz to 202.7MHz using a clock multiplier of 25. This all the while running the HT and NB speeds in excess of 2600MHz and using 2400MHz rated memory. Voltages were milder than I was expecting to use at 1.50v, set in the BIOS for the CPU. Thehe DRAM was run at its rated 1.65v. The rest of the voltages in the BIOS were set to the default values in lieu of running on auto. At this speed and voltage, I could not squeeze any more out of the chip without it throttling due to the thermals. I feel there is more available with this one with a better cooling system.

The FX-9370 acted in all respects like the FX 9590 when it came to overclocking and reached almost as high, albeit using a bit more voltage to get the job done. As a slower chip out of the gate, there was more overclocking headroom available to improve performance, where the FX-9590 only had 368MHz worth of overhead. Ultimately, I had to settle for a thermally limited 5016MHz, or 616MHz bump, over the base clock speed of 4.4GHz. All other settings in the BIOS were equal to that of the FX-9590, but the FX-9370 needed 1.54v to break the 5GHz barrier. As far as looking for a lot of room on these chips, AMD found most of it when it binned these samples out. Both chips could easily boot to 5.2GHz and do screenshots, but for full-on testing and stability, I stuck with the numbers you see here.

 

 

 

 

Maximum Core Clock Speed:

Each CPU has been tested for stability at the listed overclocked speeds. These clock speeds will represent the level of performance shown by the overclocked scores in the testing.

 

 

Benchmarks:

  • Scientific & Data:
  1. Apophysis
  2. WinRAR
  3. Geekbench 3
  4. Bibble 5
  5. Office 2010
  6. POV-Ray 3.7
  7. ProShow Gold
  8. HandBrake .99
  9. Sandra 2014 SP2
  10. AIDA64
  11. Cinebench R15
  12. X.264 Benchmark
  13. PC Mark 8
  • Video:
  1. Metro: Last Light
  2. Batman: Arkham Origins
  3. 3DMark

Well we have our lineup and maximum stable overclocks for each respective CPU; time to see what results we get.




Related Products
Random Pic
© 2001-2017 Overclockers Club ® Privacy Policy
Elapsed: 0.0580470562   (xlweb1)