766 Results for

fx-9590

Pricing not available

Review

Marshall Major 50 FX

The Marshall Major 50 FX headphones may look a little gaudy, but the company's rock tradition is safe with a premium build and exciting sound.

May. 21, 2013

4 stars Editors' rating on Jun. 7, 2013
Review

FX Photo Studio (iOS)

FX Photo Studio stands out for the sheer number of effects that are available, but it can be a struggle to get the app to do what you want.

Apr. 24, 2013

3.5 stars Editors' rating on Apr. 25, 2013

Pricing not available

Review

Sharp FX - black (AT&T)

The Sharp FX has plenty of multimedia features and additional services to occupy socialites and text-happy users, but mediocre call quality and some usability flaws keep it from fulfilling its complete potential.

Jul. 21, 2010

3 stars Editors' rating on Jul. 30, 2010
1 stars User rating out of 5 reviews

MSRP: $99.99

Review

Sharp FX Plus (AT&T)

The Sharp FX Plus is a budget Android 2.2 smartphone for certain first-timers, but when it comes to some features, you get what you pay for.

Aug. 2, 2011

3 stars Editors' rating on Sep. 14, 2011
1.5 stars User rating out of 2 reviews
Review

AMD Athlon 64 FX-62

AMD's Athlon 64 FX-62 helps usher in the new Socket AM2 chipset, but incremental performance gains make AMD look vulnerable to Intel's next-gen chips, due later this year.

May. 22, 2006

3 stars Editors' rating on May. 22, 2006

MSRP: $713.00

Editors' Take

AMD Athlon 64 FX-60

The latest high-end chip from AMD introduces dual-core processing to AMD's ultra-high-end enthusiast FX line. But while the Athlon 64 FX-60 set new records on our current benchmarks, the chip doesn't play well with Nvidia's graphics cards. Assuming that this issue gets sorted out, the FX-60 shows great promise.

Dec. 15, 2005

4 stars User rating out of 1 reviews

Pricing not available

Review

XFX GeForce FX 5950 Ultra

The XFX GeForce FX 5950 Ultra graphics card is one of the fastest we've seen, but you can get nearly the same performance for around $100 less.

Dec. 15, 2003

3.5 stars Editors' rating on Jan. 15, 2004