FX-9590 vs Ryzen 7 3700X

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

FX-9590 vs Ryzen 7 3700X FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

FX-9590 vs Ryzen 7 3700X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

FX-9590

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 3700X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (10,194 vs 22,430).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.1 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($350 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌238.5% higher power demand at 220W vs 65W.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +37.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $350 MSRP).
✅Delivers 134.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 29.1 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $350 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 220W, a 155W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 3700X better than FX-9590?

Yes. Ryzen 7 3700X is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 37.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 120% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 7 3700X is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 37.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 3700X is the stronger fit. You are getting 120% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen 7 3700X is the better buy right now. Ryzen 7 3700X comes in $21 cheaper on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $350 MSRP, and it still gives you a 37.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 134.1% better value on MSRP (68.2 vs 29.1 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 7 3700X makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

FX-9590 vs Ryzen 7 3700X Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

FX-9590

The FX-9590 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 July 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 4.7 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 220 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 10,194 points. Launch price was $149.

Ryzen 7 3700X

The Ryzen 7 3700X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,430 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-9590 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Ryzen 7 3700X's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the FX-9590 versus 4.4 GHz on the Ryzen 7 3700X — a 12.8% clock advantage for the FX-9590 (base: 4.7 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The FX-9590 uses the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture (32 nm), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the FX-9590 scores 10,194 against the Ryzen 7 3700X's 22,430 — a 75% lead for the Ryzen 7 3700X.

Feature	FX-9590	Ryzen 7 3700X
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	5 GHz+14%	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	4.7 GHz+31%	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	—	32 MB
L2 Cache	8192 kB+1500%	512K (per core)
Process	32 nm	7 nm, 12 nm-78%
Architecture	Vishera (2012−2015)	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
PassMark	10,194	22,430+120%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-9590 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-9590	Ryzen 7 3700X
Socket	AM3+	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 4.0+100%
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	—	128 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	24

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-9590 was priced at $350, while the Ryzen 7 3700X came in at $329. On launch pricing ($350 vs $329), Ryzen 7 3700X was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-9590 delivers 29.1 pts/$ vs 68.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 3700X — making the Ryzen 7 3700X the 80.3% better value option.

Feature	FX-9590	Ryzen 7 3700X
MSRP	$350	$329-6%
Performance per Dollar	29.1	68.2+134%
Release Date	2013	2019

Search FX-9590 on Amazon

Search Ryzen 7 3700X on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.