I'm just a simple scrub, don't worry, I'll do my best!
I'm just a simple scrub, don't worry, I'll do my best!
I started as a beginner when my brother gave me a gaming PC around 2012. A few years later, I sold it to a friend in university and he returned it for free. It ran on an AM3+ board, so I was curious—would a FX 9590 clocked at 4.7GHz keep up with a GTX 1060 with 6GB of VRAM?
the fx9590 cpu was designed for overclockers to explore maximum performance, but it’s not suited for regular use or modern gaming setups. placing such a high-power chip on an older board is risky—if the board already has something like an fx8300, it’s best to leave it as is. changing the CPU won’t help much because the 1060 can run most games fine, though some may feel limited due to its core count. avoid upgrading if the board has more than six cores; an 8-core model won’t be significantly faster than an R3 1200. playing on the R3 offers a better experience, and while older FX machines are fun for free, they’re not ideal for current gaming needs.
I own a 5GHz 8320E system in my closet, which should run better than the 9590 despite having the same silicon and higher clock speed. It struggled with my old R9 380 4GB in many games, making it weaker than the 1060. The main bottleneck appears in every Assassin's Creed title released in the last five years, and also in Watch Dogs. There seems to be a consistent issue in GTA V and FFXV as well. I don't recall other specific games where this happened, but most FX CPUs tend not to cause such bottlenecks.
It's fine for today's games; some players might enjoy them more than others. Keep in mind that certain titles relying heavily on core numbers could pose challenges for the FX9590, though generally it should work well for most games right now.