Originally Posted by PedroC1999
AMD is still strong, I hate these fanboys that say AMD is worthless etc.
The advantage of higher binned 9xxx is the lower voltage at those speeds.
For AMD to keep up with Intel, they need to be clocked at least 300Mhz higher, but going with the 9xxx, he can OC further with the same cooling solution, maybe resulting in a 5-5.3Ghz daily overclock, that is loads, and will probably beat intel in those situations
First of all no one in here said anything close to AMD is worthless. Every chip has its place, but when spending $1300+ on gpus, cheaping out on the cpu isn't the smartest decision.
Secondly, In the reviews that are out, the fx9590 could not even do all cores @ 5ghz without overheating, and at 5.2ghz automatically shut off if it went under any load. In reality it runs between 4.5ghz and 4.7ghz depending on core usage. I highly doubt you will be getting over 5ghz stable overclock unless you have an expensive water cooling loop or something better.
Read here if you think I made that up: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz-18.html
It says they chose the leaky chips. Not low voltage chips. Look at the reviews.
Even if you somehow could get the chip stable at 5.2ghz, Intel is going to outperform it at a much more realistically achievable clock speed, without exotic means of cooling. Relying on an overclock for the performance you want is not very ideal. No overclock is guaranteed. I have no idea why you wouldn't want the to get the best performance you can out of your $1300 set of gpus. Just because you prefer one manufacturer over another?
If this was 10 years ago I would have had an AMD cpu in my sig as would many others. But this is now, and for running multiple high end gpu's
Intel has the edge.Edited by icehotshot - 7/26/13 at 8:51am