Before any of the Intel fanboys or AMD haters get started...
Yes I am a AMD Fanboy, Yes I like Intel, have a system(3) in the house that uses Intel. I have a budget and I heavily multi-task, and play games that use multiple threads, so that sexxy i7 is out of the question. And, yes I know Intel beats AMD in single thread appications, always has and possibly always will.
Now that that is out of the way...
My plans as of right now is to get the ASRock 990FX Extreme9, which is advertised as the Go-To board for the FX 9590. From what I have seen, and read, the FX 9590 is nothing more then a pre-OCed FX 8350. That, creates a decent level of heat and has a 220w power draw for 4.7GHz, and an OC capability of 5.0-5.1 GHz. And, when the FX 8350 is OCed to 4.7-50GHz, there is almost no difference in performance.
So, my question is, is it really worth paying the extra $50-$150 for the FX 9590 or just get the FX 8350 and just OC it whenever I need the extra power? What kind of heat does a 4.7GHz OCed FX 8350 put off compared to the out of the box 4.7GHz FX 9590? What is the power draw of an 4.7GHz OCed 8350 compared to the out of the box 4.7GHz FX 9590?
Another question, I know that the FX series is speced for 1886MHz RAM, yet the boards that support AM3+ support higher RAM speeds. Does this imply that the CPU in a way can be Oced or something rather to work with higher RAM speeds? Was looking at the Kingston HyperX Predator Beast DDR3 2133MHz 32GB kit.
Yes I am a AMD Fanboy, Yes I like Intel, have a system(3) in the house that uses Intel. I have a budget and I heavily multi-task, and play games that use multiple threads, so that sexxy i7 is out of the question. And, yes I know Intel beats AMD in single thread appications, always has and possibly always will.
Now that that is out of the way...
My plans as of right now is to get the ASRock 990FX Extreme9, which is advertised as the Go-To board for the FX 9590. From what I have seen, and read, the FX 9590 is nothing more then a pre-OCed FX 8350. That, creates a decent level of heat and has a 220w power draw for 4.7GHz, and an OC capability of 5.0-5.1 GHz. And, when the FX 8350 is OCed to 4.7-50GHz, there is almost no difference in performance.
So, my question is, is it really worth paying the extra $50-$150 for the FX 9590 or just get the FX 8350 and just OC it whenever I need the extra power? What kind of heat does a 4.7GHz OCed FX 8350 put off compared to the out of the box 4.7GHz FX 9590? What is the power draw of an 4.7GHz OCed 8350 compared to the out of the box 4.7GHz FX 9590?
Another question, I know that the FX series is speced for 1886MHz RAM, yet the boards that support AM3+ support higher RAM speeds. Does this imply that the CPU in a way can be Oced or something rather to work with higher RAM speeds? Was looking at the Kingston HyperX Predator Beast DDR3 2133MHz 32GB kit.