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 Core i7 4790

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 4790

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Front view of AMD FX 9590

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 9590

Report a correction
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 4790 vs FX 9590

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 4790
13,718
FX 9590
13,818

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 4790
3,632
FX 9590
2,549

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 4790
4,570,000 MB/s
FX 9590
2,790,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 4790
13,457
FX 9590
12,725

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i7 4790
14,348
FX 9590
13,802

GeekBench

Core i7 4790
14,348
FX 9590
13,802

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i7 4790
9,996
FX 9590
10,589

PassMark (Single Core)

Core i7 4790
2,284
FX 9590
1,741

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i7 4790  vs
FX 9590 
Clock speed 3.6 GHz 4.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 4 GHz 5 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Socket type
LGA 1150
AM3+
Is unlocked No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 84W 220W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 53 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 192.72 $/year
Performance per watt 10.77 pt/W 5.39 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 178.75W

details

Core i7 4790  vs
FX 9590 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 8 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 36 25
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 57°C

overclocking

PassMark (Overclocked) 6,039.5 10,860

integrated graphics

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 1,200 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i7 4790
Report a correction
AMD FX 9590
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 17 comments.
exactly the same ^ :D
i7
I have had a FX6300 then a FX8350 when I went Intel and bought the 4790...Dude its in a different class altogether.
Dude have you even tried Intel? I've had AMD processors for years and a couple of years ago i bought an i5 2500k and since then I'm an Intel fan. Not saying AMD isn't god ...but Intel runs more smoothly ...it's like the technology is more mature and well balanced.
Agreed ;)) and the TDP is like 3 times more efficient than AMD ( 84W vs 220W)
For mult thread and complex videoing Intel not in the game....have a look at the following Benchmark comparisons: WinRar 5.01, PC Mark 8, Hybrid x 2.65, 4K frame video conversion, Rendering , PovRay, Synthetic 7-up and company of heroes gaming in all cases the i7 4790 cpu is not a factor against AMD's 9590 multi-core CPU...WOW !!! http://www.anandtech.com/show/8316/amds-5-ghz-turbo-cpu-in-retail-the-fx9590-and-asrock-990fx-extreme9-review. Goes to show you for single thread application and old version testing the Intel stacked against the deck.....once multi-tasking or multi-threading is involved the intel i7 4790 does not stack up....
VIDEO EDITING 4K !!!!!
Intel not a factor with high resolution video conversion...WOW !!!
im am very curious as to how the 4790 got an 8.1 rating on the overclock score when you cant overclock it at all (save for BCLK) ...
Go amd dude intel is NOT better idk why people think is like a god or somthing
Oh wow, the electric bills I pay $4 more per year. So basically, you must wait 18.5 years to get your money back of how much more it is.. Stupid Intel fanboys always say that. I love Intel a lot but theres no point in saying amd makes you pay like $500 more on electric bills.
I7 beated the shit of fx 9590 even in all core using mult core 8 core's benchs, so stop crying and gtfo.
No point in going cheap up front if you wind up paying out your ass in electric bills. :p
I agree I used to buy amd because of the lower power consump and cooling with equal or decent performance at cheaper cost , now look at his!
Anything that can utilize 4 cores or less, the 4790 will obliterate it. While the 9590 edged it out in passmark, the 4790 still beat it on cinebench. Not only that, 9590 lost in performance per dollar, which is amd's only real selling point.
lol amd fanboy buthurt :p
What kind of processor is the best of them ?
comments powered by Disqus