Cooling and Power

Frankly, I had an idea of how all four of the FX CPUs would perform in the standard performance testing. What I really had no idea about was what to expect from them in both power usage and also temperatures. They range from the lower wattage FX-8370e all the way to the extreme clock speeds of the FX-9590. Because of that the only thing I did expect was a wide range of results. Without a doubt I got that. For starters on the power usage charge the FX-9590 topped the charts both at idle and under load but it was actually fairly close to what Intel was seeing two years ago with the i7-3970X. The newer Intel CPUs have improved on that greatly though, especially on the idle side of things. The FX-9590 actually pulls more at idle than the i7-4790K did under load! On the other end of the spectrum though, the FX-8370e did very well on the load side in comparison to the other CPUs. At idle it could use a little improvement, but it is a nice contrast to the other FX CPUs. They remind me of big gas guzzling cars that are willing to get the highest clock speed possible at the cost of fuel consumption.

graph12

Once again we hit the full spectrum. With the FX-9590 and FX-9370 I expected nothing less though. The fact is AMD likes to bundle them both with a full water cooling kit because they really do need the best possible cooling. Running both of them on air is possible, but you better have a bigger heatsink than the already large Noctua NH-U14S used in my testing. The FX-8370 and the FX-8370e helped cool things down with numbers that compare well with Intel’s offerings. The FX-8370e even ran 4 degrees cooler than the new low 5960X.

graph13

 

Log in to comment

garfi3ld's Avatar
garfi3ld replied the topic: #35605 04 Sep 2014 17:42
AMD fans can rejoice, there are finally new options from their FX line of CPUs. The question is how do they perform? Check out the review to find out!

We have 2008 guests and one member online

supportus