CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4790K vs 9590

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

4790K
8.5
FX 9590
8.0
Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark and GeekBench

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

4790K
10.0
FX 9590
8.0
Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

4790K
5.1
FX 9590
5.0
TDP

Value

4790K
7.0
FX 9590
7.2
Performance Per Dollar

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel 4790K

Reasons to consider the
Intel 4790K

Report a correction
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 71.5W vs 178.75W 2.5x lower typical power consumption
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 2,533 vs 1,725 More than 45% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score 8,785 vs 4,905 Around 80% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score
Significantly more l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 2x more l3 cache per core
Significantly better PassMark (Overclocked) score 6,925.3 vs 4,229.4 Around 65% better PassMark (Overclocked) score
Better performance per watt 17.22 pt/W vs 5.04 pt/W Around 3.5x better performance per watt
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 16,649 vs 14,735 Around 15% better geekbench (64-bit) score
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 77.09 $/year vs 192.72 $/year 2.5x lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 21.2 $/year vs 53 $/year 2.5x lower annual home energy cost
Better cinebench r10 32Bit score 33,538 vs 26,635 More than 25% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
Marginally newer Apr, 2014 vs Jun, 2013 Release date 9 months later
Front view of AMD FX 9590

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 9590

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 4.7 GHz vs 4 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz Around 15% higher turbo clock speed
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 5.15 GHz vs 4.61 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 5.2 GHz vs 4.84 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of 4790K vs FX 9590

GeekBench (32-bit)

4790K
15,662
FX 9590
12,784

GeekBench (64-bit)

4790K
16,649
FX 9590
14,735

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

4790K
33,538
FX 9590
26,635
4790K FX 9590 @ anandtech.com
The gains are smallest in general-application suites like PCMark 7 and larger in CPU-intensive programs like Photoshop CS6, the rendering program POV-RAY, and the 3D rendering test, Cinebench 11.5.
4790K | by PCMag (Jul, 2014)

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

4790K
8,785
FX 9590
4,905
4790K FX 9590 @ anandtech.com

Passmark

4790K
11,309
FX 9590
10,589
4790K FX 9590 @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

4790K
2,533
FX 9590
1,725

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

4790K  vs
FX 9590 
Clock speed 4 GHz 4.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 4.4 GHz 5 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
XOP
SSE3
FMA3
SSE2
FMA4
F16C
ABM
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AVX 2.0
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,250 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333

details

4790K  vs
FX 9590 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.61 GHz 5.15 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.84 GHz 5.2 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 6,925.3 4,229.4
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.61 GHz 5.15 GHz

power consumption

TDP 88W 220W
Annual home energy cost 21.2 $/year 53 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 77.09 $/year 192.72 $/year
Performance per watt 17.22 pt/W 5.04 pt/W
Typical power consumption 71.5W 178.75W
Intel 4790K
Report a correction
AMD FX 9590
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 3 comments.
True this is one of the worst creations of AMD
the 9590 is just an overclocked FX 8320... Yet it's over DOUBLE the price ;l
4790K: aaaahhhhchooo~~! oops, where is 9590?
comments powered by Disqus