Description

I work in the computer repair business and I have spent the past eight years helping everyone build and fix their own machines, I decided it was time for a build of my own. The ONLY problem I had was the automatic CPU turbo feature caused the computer to freeze and reboot. Set the CPU to 5.0ghz and not a single problem afterwards. Everything stays shockingly cool, despite what everyone says about the 9590. Also the memory I have in my machine is the one listed and not the ones you see in the picture. I was too anxious to get the pictures up. Oh and for all of you Intel fans the Intel SSD is substantially slower than the amd SSD. I tried to give Intel a chance. Disappoint. I also purchased 3 Fractal case fans that are not listed. 7 fans total. 5 140mm Fractal fans and the 2 corsair 120mm fans. The system is very quiet. The radiator is setup with fans blowing onto it and fans pulling air through it. I believe they call that push pull. Ooooops the power supply fan. 8 total. Lol

Comments

  • 58 months ago
  • 12 points

I like seeing an AMD cpu instead of another i5

  • 58 months ago
  • 4 points

AMD is pretty great and I don't mind supporting them, sticking it to Intel makes my day

  • 58 months ago
  • 8 points

lol amd ssd next to an intel one, they must hate each other

  • 58 months ago
  • 3 points

Looks nice cable management is decent. Why did you decide to go with the 9590 over something like a i5-4690k?

  • 58 months ago
  • 2 points

Well the 9590 nearly equals the 4770k in performance, for the price of the 4690k, so its not a bad idea.http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-9590+Eight-Core

  • 58 months ago
  • -1 points

Intel translates to overrated. First 8 core AMD introduced 6-8 months before Intel. Good job intel. Intel also makes processors then can't figure out how to get them to work properly in motherboards. Ever wonder how Asus is always the fastest to have a compatible board?

  • 58 months ago
  • 5 points

I need chemo after reading this.

  • 58 months ago
  • -2 points

Actually AMD has 4 logical cores or threads per physical core, essentially revealing the 8-core FX processors as 4-core "hyperthreaded" processors similar in performance to Intel's Core I7 lineup. Also, an Intel processor known as the 3960x had 6 hyperthreaded cores, making it a 12-core processor in Q3 2011 compared to the 8-core FX from mid 2012. You seem to be wrong, sir. Don't worry though we all make mistakes.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

Looks like someone needs to do some more research.

The AMD FX-8000 and 9000 series processors actually have 8 physical cores. Note that AMD cores and Intel cores are not directly comparable because AMD cores share some resources (such as FPU and AVX units).

The thing that's most comparable to a core in an Intel CPU is likely the module in an AMD CPU, and there are only four of those. Just like an Intel physical core can contain two virtual cores, AMD physical modules contain two physical cores. But Windows has only one place to put a core count.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

okay I guess you could be right about the core count but the 3960x still came out earlier

  • 58 months ago
  • 3 points

6 core came out before 8 core. Good.

  • 58 months ago
  • 3 points

Digging the fans on the bottom of the case. Looks great. And hell yeah AMD.

  • 58 months ago
  • 2 points

i would say this is all amd build but its missing amd r9 gamer series ram and it has a intel ssd in it

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

Latency too high on AMD memory. And the Intel SSD was to satisfy my curiosity. Lol

  • 58 months ago
  • 2 points

ahh the latency isn't too bad i got mine for cheap so i don't care

  • 58 months ago
  • 2 points

I did the math. 8 extra cycles for everything. At 1800. Not something most can notice but it's still time.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

How did you do the push/pull setup in the front? I have 2 140mm in the front and a Corsair h105 and would like to do something similar to yours

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

There are two separate sets of screw holes on the front of the R5. Take the fans out and you can like the radiator up in the front. Use very flat screws or the fans on the front won't fit so easy.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

I have a Corsair h105 at the top of my R5. Is it possible to mount it to the front in a push pull pull setup like how yours is? I have 2 140mm intake fans on the front right behind the dust filter, so I'm wondering if there are even enough screw holes for the radiator to fit in the front? I want to put the moduvents back on the top and see how they fair with temps and everything and the rear the be my only exhaust.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

The 105 and h100i should have the same length hoses so it should workout well.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

My gpu is an GTX 970 and it gets to like 77c under load and I have the same setup as you. I don't know what I did wrong.

  • 57 months ago
  • 1 point

It's probably related to your CPU. Which build are you talking about?

  • 55 months ago
  • 1 point

Great build and LOVE the two bottom fans! I have H110i, is it possible to put it in the font with push/pull and still put two fans at the bottom?

  • 49 months ago
  • 1 point

My only gripe with this system is the fan placement. You will most likely get better temperatures with the corsair fans that came with the h100i in the front of the rad as push and the lower rpm fractals as pull. the corsairs have higher static pressure and will help with blowing air into the rad, and pull fans are best at lower rpms and its not pushing through anything so the fractals would be better as pull. Also the two on the bottom is a little excessive, you could probably go without the one closest to the front and leave the one supplying fresh air to the GPU. Not down talking the build at all however, its a solid build. Just throwing my 2 cents out.

  • 58 months ago
  • 0 points

Cool build but I got to say the gen 3 Sabertooth over the gen 2 is a head scratcher. Considering that pcie 3.0 is pointless with gpu's since they can't max pcie 2.0, and that really is the only reason the gen 3 existed for its limited run. Spending the extra 35 for gen 3 makes no sense to me. +1 for a good build anyways

  • 58 months ago
  • 0 points

I intend on adding another r9 290x. When I do that the open lanes will end up being used as the crossfire bridge. Because AMD has made it simple enough to not need an extra cable on the card for multi GPU support.

  • 58 months ago
  • -1 points

I've never seen 290x's in crossfire being bottlenecked by 16x pcie 2.0 lanes. The only thing that I've seen bottleneck 290x crossfire is in cpu bound games the cpu not being fast enough.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

Probably because you've never seen anyone compare it to the performance of PCI-e 3.0. Even with just one card I get 10-15 more frames. Same board different slot. Please explain that to me.

  • 58 months ago
  • 0 points

Except in this pudget systems test where they tested with faster cpus then yours in 8x and 16x in both pcie 2.0 and 3.0 and found that all tests came back within the margin of error of each other. Here's that artical: http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Impact-of-PCI-E-Speed-on-Gaming-Performance-518/ Your either changing settings, have a major motherboard problem or a straight placebo effect.

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

Or you are using an Intel CPU which uses the CPU to delegate graphics to peripherals. Up until the AMD FM2 chip AMD did not do this all the time. Intel intends to keep the CPU in control of everything on the board.

  • 58 months ago
  • 0 points

Why didn't you get an i5 4690k, it has better performance, uses less wattage, is less hot, and costs the same as a 9590. Besides the 9590 is just an over clocked 8320, so why not just get an 8320 and over clock.

Also, why not get a 970 they're around the same price point as the 290x, but they have higher performance, better power efficiency, shadowplay, and Geforce experience.

Not a bad build overall but I question some of the part choices.

  • 58 months ago
  • 5 points

I don't think a 970 is better than a r9 290x

  • 58 months ago
  • 2 points

Yeah, the 970 isn't better than an R9 290x in terms of performance. The 290x is slightly faster. What the 970 has over the 290x is it's great efficiency.

  • 58 months ago
  • 4 points

but the r9 290x can be found for less than 300$ and i saw many going for 200$ or below off ebay new

  • 58 months ago
  • 5 points

Yeah, you can find tons of cheap 290/290X cards these days. Great card.

  • 58 months ago
  • 4 points

I'd rather spend 500$ on two r9 290x than 500$ on a 980

  • 58 months ago
  • 1 point

Why?