Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss? Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news! Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news! VS Intel Celeron N3050 AMD FX 9590 CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each Reasons to consider the

Intel Celeron N3050 Report a correction Report a correction Much lower typical power consumption 4.88W vs 178.75W 36.7x lower typical power consumption Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required Much lower annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year vs 53 $/year 36.7x lower annual home energy cost Much lower annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year vs 192.72 $/year 36.7x lower annual commercial energy cost Significantly better performance per watt 8.65 pt/W vs 5.39 pt/W More than 60% better performance per watt Newer Jan, 2015 vs Jul, 2013 Release date over 1 years later Reasons to consider the

AMD FX 9590 Report a correction Report a correction Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 2 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later Much higher clock speed 4.7 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 3x higher clock speed Much higher turbo clock speed 5 GHz vs 2.16 GHz More than 2.2x higher turbo clock speed Much better performance per dollar 5.16 pt/$ vs 0.48 pt/$ Around 10.8x better performance per dollar Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 5.06 GHz vs 2.14 GHz More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air) Much better PassMark score 10,589 vs 885 Around 12x better PassMark score Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,741 vs 467 Around 3.8x better PassMark (Single core) score More cores 8 vs 2 6 more cores; run more applications at once More threads 8 vs 2 6 more threads Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 5.06 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 3.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Specifications Full list of technical specs summary Celeron N3050 vs FX 9590 Clock speed 1.6 GHz 4.7 GHz Turbo clock speed 2.16 GHz 5 GHz Cores Dual core Octa core features Has a NX bit Yes Yes Has virtualization support Yes Yes Instruction set extensions SSE4a AVX 1.1 SSE2 F16C MMX XOP AVX SSE3 SSE ABM BMI1 CLMUL AMD64 SSE4.1 FMA4 FMA3 SSE4.2 CVT16 AMD-V Supplemental SSE3 AES TBM Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes power consumption TDP 6W 220W Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 53 $/year Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 192.72 $/year Performance per watt 8.65 pt/W 5.39 pt/W Typical power consumption 4.88W 178.75W details Celeron N3050 vs FX 9590 Architecture x86-64 x86-64 Threads 2 8 L2 cache 2 MB 8 MB L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core Manufacture process 14 nm 32 nm Max CPUs 1 1 overclocking Overclocked clock speed 2.14 GHz 5.06 GHz Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 5.06 GHz Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.14 GHz 5.06 GHz integrated graphics GPU GPU None Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A Number of displays supported 3 N/A GPU clock speed 320 MHz N/A memory controller Memory controller Built-in Built-in Memory type DDR3-1866 DDR3L-1600 Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel Supports ECC No Yes Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s