Average Bench: 61.7% (172nd of 980)

Based on 8,178 user benchmarks.  Devices: 178BFBFF00600F20, 178BFBFF00600F12 Model: AMD FX(tm)-9590 Eight-Core Processor

AMD released the FX-9590 back in July 2013 but it's not until recently that these processors have started hitting the shelves and even now prices are still extremely high. This is the first mainstream 5GHz processor but clock speed isn't the key performance indicator it once was. Comparing the 9590 to the 8350 shows that the 9590 has 16% better overall performance which is almost exactly in line with its base clock increase from 4.0 to 4.7 GHz. Despite this performance boost the 9590 still lags Intel's most recent 4770K Haswell processor by 26% and that's despite the AMD's 27% higher base clock. In terms of relative performance the AMD's strong point is Integer processing where it has 8 processing units vs just four (one per core) in the 4770K. Overall, especially at current prices, the 9590 doesn't represent good value for money. [Jan '14 CPUPro]

ADVERTISEMENT

Above average average bench

The AMD FX-9590 averaged 38.2% lower than the peak scores attained by the group leaders. This isn't a great result which indicates that there are much faster alternatives on the comparison list.

Strengths

Multi Core Integer Speed 558Pts
Avg. Multi Core Mixed Speed 529Pts

Very good consistency

The range of scores (95th - 5th percentile) for the AMD FX-9590 is just 17.8%. This is a relatively narrow range which indicates that the AMD FX-9590 performs reasonably consistently under varying real world conditions.

Weaknesses

Quad Core Floating Point Speed 267Pts
Single Core Floating Point Speed 75.4Pts
ADVERTISEMENT

Average Bench

(Based on 8,178 samples)
Min Avg Max
73.8 SC Int 92.5 103
62.9 SC Float 75.4 85.2
68.3 SC Mixed 83 91.9
66.9% 83.6 Pts
Min Avg Max
253 QC Int 327 378
213 QC Float 267 313
247 QC Mixed 302 342
67.8% 299 Pts
Min Avg Max
418 MC Int 558 618
352 MC Float 449 526
409 MC Mixed 529 605
77.2% 512 Pts
User Benchmarks Bench Single core Quad core Multi core
The fastest CPU (mainstream) averages a speed of 100%
CPU 1, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4.8 GHz, turbo 4.8 GHz (avg)
SC Int 98.7
SC Float 82.9
SC Mixed 90.5
73% 90.7 Pts
QC Int 347
QC Float 301
QC Mixed 335
74% 328 Pts
MC Int 611
MC Float 529
MC Mixed 608
88% 583 Pts
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4.7 GHz, turbo 4.75 GHz (avg)
SC Int 98.1
SC Float 78.8
SC Mixed 89.6
71% 88.8 Pts
QC Int 348
QC Float 257
QC Mixed 302
69% 302 Pts
MC Int 601
MC Float 472
MC Mixed 563
82% 545 Pts
Socket 942, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 4.4 GHz, turbo 4.4 GHz (avg)
SC Int 89.7
SC Float 68.3
SC Mixed 77.3
63% 78.4 Pts
QC Int 303
QC Float 242
QC Mixed 281
62% 275 Pts
MC Int 525
MC Float 373
MC Mixed 492
70% 463 Pts
8,178 MORE »

 Market Share (See Leaders)

The number of benchmark samples for this model as a percentage of all 6,241,539 CPUs tested.

 Prices

NeweggUS $1223 days
AmazonUS $12615 mins
EbayUS $1431 min
Send price feedback
Typical FX-9590 Builds (Compare 3,655 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings.
Gaming
Gaming 58%
Gunboat
Desktop
Desktop 59%
Gunboat
Workstation
Workstation 48%
Yacht

Motherboard: Asus CROSSHAIR V FORMULA-Z - $220

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 74% - Very good Total price: $832

Popular FX-9590 compatible motherboards:

How Fast Is Your CPU? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month

How it works

  • - Download and run UserBenchMark (UBM).
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write and mixed IO.
  • - Checks include: 4k Align, NCQ, TRIM, SATA, USB & S.M.A.R.T.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the highest voted in class.
  • - Find the best upgrades.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.
Processor Rankings (Price vs Performance) December 2017 CPU Rankings.

Welcome to our desktop CPU comparison. We calculate effective speed which measures real world performance for typical consumers. Effective speed is adjusted by price to yield a value for money rating which is geared towards gamers. Calculated values don't always paint the whole picture so we check them against hundreds of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors and more to bring you the definitive list of top CPUs. [CPUPro]

 Comments

AMD Unleashes First-Ever 5 GHz Processor...

Added 3 years ago.

Good (edit your comment) Add link

3 days ago.

I got this CPU from newegg. At first at a littie issues with it not booting. 8 cores at 4.7 was a bit unabled. After playing around with it and some BIOS setting changes got it up and working. It runs great can handle anything I throw at it game wise and not bad for the price.

Comment 

More cache, 8 cores, cheaper MB, have 20+ applications open still fast.—Sep '14

Comment 

Great multithreaded performance, but at 220W, this chip is a beast. I like this chip, but Intel's chips are considerably more efficient in terms of power consumption.—Oct '14

Comment 

I heard mixed reviews of the 9590, but when prices dropped picked on up and my MB already supported it. It has worked great, rock solid for me in ASrock extreme 9 MB. No problems, but hard to overclock so I keep it stock with Corsair H80 cooler. Mine system tested above average on all tests and my rig is strictly budget, so that's good. I don't think I could get more value for the dollar than what I have in my rig. Great CPU!—Oct '15


Excellent

17 days ago.

my friend have this Cpu and he play all games on Highest settings with high fps


Excellent

23 days ago.

For 150£ today its very good value for an 8 core cpu it still will be much better than many i3 for that money


Excellent

8 days ago.

Beast


Poor

4 months ago.

WAWOOOOOOOOO VERY GOOOOOOODD


Above average

3 years ago.


Terrible

2 months ago.

low perfomance for that price


Poor

4 months ago.

it low for 4k


Terrible

14 months ago.

This thing will probably start a fire if you don't use a watercooler with it. 220 watts is WAY too much for a small chip and this is basically an overclocked version of the FX 8350. There's literally no difference. Also it's not 8 cores. 4 CORES, 8 THREADS. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE


Average

1 month ago.

Your never going to believe this #1. 125w is too much 75w is more than enough and them expensive motherboards are not needed. picture says a thousand words but first the company rig setup is as following. MB. gigabyte ga-78lmt-s2 rev 1.2 #2.CPU and AIR Cooler. AMD fx9890 @ 4.9ghz with cheapest stock cooler that came on the fx4300 it swapped out. #3. Kingston hyper furyx blue 16gb 1333mhz cas lat 10 stock clock which is overclocked to 1600 cas lat12 #4. Crappy old gateway hdd snagged out of a antique laptop. #5. Gtx 950 gpu #6. Corseair CX750M 750w psu I think 75w is fine with this cpu obviosly i cant use this until i receive a better cooler but this shows air is possible unless copper pipes are truely garbage. got it running 4.9 on and uncompaible motherboard that just needs a better north bridge heatsink and at most a h60 would probably be overkill until i hit around 5.2 to 5.3 ghz im willing to bet. Maybe i just won the lotteries lottery but im really not that lucky and i think the factory 220w statement was a cock up nobody ever cought and 120w is the max. This mb will give you an error message about cpu right away and the only way to bypass it with your saved bios settings is to hit esc before it gets to 0 every time you boot/restart. interesting non the less and computer gambles seem to be paying off for me as I can make it exceptional like my evga980 ftw v1 testing out at 93% with 4k resolution on my 1600x rig. ehh didn't realize max temp was 57c might have damaged it a tiny bit as it opens apps slower now but it was a fun mistake. Thomas your stupid and userbenchmark you got it wrong 8 core 8 thread look it up @ amd.com

Image  mega.nz/...
Proof of uncompadable mb and air cooler running test at 4.9 getting same scores as the expensive boards along with cpu damaging stupidity temps. should have looked it up rather than assuming 80-90c is thermonuclear temp range like lots of their cpus are.

Proof of uncompadable mb and air cooler running test at 4.9 getting same scores as the expensive boards along with cpu damaging stupidity temps. should have looked it up rather than assuming 80-90c is thermonuclear temp range like lots of their cpus are.


Your
opinion?
980 Processors (Compared) Thousands of user benchmarks compiled into one comparison list.

See how consistently different CPUs perform with varying real world conditions. The charts also illustrate overall performance, popularity and rank.

 Frequently Asked Questions

 Best User Rated

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i7-7700K $313Nvidia GTX 1070 $410Samsung 850 Evo 250GB $90
AMD Ryzen 7 1700 $285AMD RX 480 $265Samsung 850 Evo 500GB $138
Intel Core i5-7600K $215Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB $260Samsung 850 Pro 256GB $113
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $45Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $200SanDisk Extreme 64GB $43
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $85G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $1,050SanDisk Extreme 32GB $22
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $60Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $215SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $10
Today's hottest deals
User Guide  •  About  •  FAQs  •  @Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback