Intel Core i5 4690K  vs AMD FX 9590 

That's a different argument all together, completely different from 'which performs better in games'. And regarding your other comment, it really depends on the context. Sure, it might be marginally faster for heavily multithreaded tasks, but the majority of software is not, and runs on only one or two cores. Meaning that for typical daily use and games, it performs quite a bit worse.

btw. regarding these 2 processors, AMD is better regarding performance.

It is all about budget market. If you can run your game decently for small bucks, why spend more.

It's still really not... in games it's individual core speed that counts. Given that games don't efficiently use lots of cores, it doesn't make sense that an octa-core with substantially slower per-core performance would perform better in games.

Yep just like me, I would wrek your face. But untill then, nothing will happen :)

Let me simplify it for you - AMD FX 9590 is better for gaming than I5 4690K. I didn't mean that AMD as a brand is better for gaming.

hah no..

Nope...stock cpu speeds - FX beats I5 in some games like Skyrim. Newer games use all six cores so FX performs even better.

Naah...for games its good

New games use 8 cores!

AMD is better for gaming.

For gaming, you can gain 10 or more fps with a cpu overclock. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Hy_3b6a4E This video is a great example that shows this.

Finally someone who can think unbiased.

all that matters is the benchmarks for the cpu if u are looking for better gaming then get an APU I agree that if you are spending enough money to get one of these CPUs then you should get a dedicated graphics card

And what programs uses more than 4 cores? Oh right. Not games. Pfft, AMD fanboi. Divide that multi core benchmark in practically half because if your up for the games and most other products, you'll only be able to use half the cores. Think im wrong? There's always google. Your uneducated approach to a flame war just lost you some faith. Oh, and take note that a lot of programs use one core even if people don't want too. It doesn't work like how you think. Scrub.

My 4690k at 4,8 would wrkt this cpu

LOL Who uses single core now? Yet another Intel fanboi benchmark!

Well, the clock speed don't matter that much for gaming though.

yep, but see the clock speeds - 9590´s 4,7GHz vs. i5´s 3,5GHz, so if you OC that intel then the FX will just sadly look at its rival.

Actually the Phenoms were decent.Bulldozers made it worser.The original Good Days of AMD CPU were the K8 Athlons.That K8 should scare the crap out of the Pentiums from Intel.Remember Back in the Days,Athlon vs Pentium were the Rage because They were FLAGSHIPS from both the rivals.Now they are just Budget CPUs.

same here, i still kepp my phenom II X4 955Be here... that is my first beast

Ok, AMD dominates the budget market (not always though) and Intel dominates the performance budget (not always though).

The scores don't all carry the same weight. The i5 single core performance (which actually matter most for gaming) absolutely crushes the FX at stock speeds while leaving plenty of room for overclocking even on stock coolers. The FX is also a power-hungry beast so over the lifetime of the device it will cost significantly more to run than the intel chip.

dont completely trust cpuboss. i visit another site and 9590 was 5% better that 4690k

I know this is old but your logic is just plain wrong! If you're spending $200+ on a CPU, it would be stupid to not buy a dedicated graphics card