CPU Rendering Tests

Rendering tests are a long-time favorite of reviewers and benchmarkers, as the code used by rendering packages is usually highly optimized to squeeze every little bit of performance out. Sometimes rendering programs end up being heavily memory dependent as well - when you have that many threads flying about with a ton of data, having low latency memory can be key to everything. Here we take a few of the usual rendering packages under Windows 10, as well as a few new interesting benchmarks.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

Corona 1.3: link

Corona is a standalone package designed to assist software like 3ds Max and Maya with photorealism via ray tracing. It's simple - shoot rays, get pixels. OK, it's more complicated than that, but the benchmark renders a fixed scene six times and offers results in terms of time and rays per second. The official benchmark tables list user submitted results in terms of time, however I feel rays per second is a better metric (in general, scores where higher is better seem to be easier to explain anyway). Corona likes to pile on the threads, so the results end up being very staggered based on thread count.

Rendering: Corona Photorealism

Corona loves threads. Game Mode goes behind the 1800X due to frequency.

Blender 2.78: link

For a render that has been around for what seems like ages, Blender is still a highly popular tool. We managed to wrap up a standard workload into the February 5 nightly build of Blender and measure the time it takes to render the first frame of the scene. Being one of the bigger open source tools out there, it means both AMD and Intel work actively to help improve the codebase, for better or for worse on their own/each other's microarchitecture.

Rendering: Blender 2.78

Blender loves threads.

LuxMark v3.1: Link

As a synthetic, LuxMark might come across as somewhat arbitrary as a renderer, given that it's mainly used to test GPUs, but it does offer both an OpenCL and a standard C++ mode. In this instance, aside from seeing the comparison in each coding mode for cores and IPC, we also get to see the difference in performance moving from a C++ based code-stack to an OpenCL one with a CPU as the main host.

Rendering: LuxMark CPU C++Rendering: LuxMark CPU OpenCL

Like Blender, LuxMark is all about the thread count. Ray tracing is very nearly a textbook case for easy multi-threaded scaling, although a couple of things pop up in the OpenCL version. Aside from the scores being lower, the jump from 1920X to 1950X isn't that great, and the quad-channel DRAM of the 1950X in Game Mode puts it over the 1800X.

POV-Ray 3.7.1b4: link

Another regular benchmark in most suites, POV-Ray is another ray-tracer but has been around for many years. It just so happens that during the run up to AMD's Ryzen launch, the code base started to get active again with developers making changes to the code and pushing out updates. Our version and benchmarking started just before that was happening, but given time we will see where the POV-Ray code ends up and adjust in due course.

Rendering: POV-Ray 3.7

POV-Ray loves threads.

Cinebench R15: link

The latest version of CineBench has also become one of those 'used everywhere' benchmarks, particularly as an indicator of single thread performance. High IPC and high frequency gives performance in ST, whereas having good scaling and many cores is where the MT test wins out.

Rendering: CineBench 15 MultiThreadedRendering: CineBench 15 SingleThreaded

Multithreaded results are as expected, and single thread seems to benefit a bit from more DRAM channels, although 200 MHz is enough to put the 1800X over the 1950X in Game Mode.

Benchmarking Performance: CPU System Tests Benchmarking Performance: CPU Web Tests
Comments Locked

104 Comments

View All Comments

  • Aisalem - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link

    Ok, I'm a noob then, actually I'm an engineer who's doing designs in AutoCad, Creo and Solidworks but from time to time like to play few games.
    So yes I'm a NOOB who has some free cash to throw AMD direction and would like to know what are the best settings for it to play a game once or twice a week without spending hours on testing those.
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link

    That makes you a workstation user, not a noob who buys Threadripper just for games.
  • pepoluan - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Why do you want to change to Game Mode anyways? Is playing in Creator Mode not Good Enough for you?
  • Ratman6161 - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Actually you sound more like the actual target audience for game mode. But for your purposes I would think you would want reviews with more heavy emphasis on workstation tasks. Gaming with it is just a sidelight.
  • Greyscend - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link

    If you really are an engineer you shouldn't need hours to figure out if you can disable SMT while "Game Mode" is active. In fact, you shouldn't even need "hours" to turn on game mode and play a few minutes of your current, favorite game, then turn off SMT (if possible in game mode) and play again. I'm no engineer but I would have to be on Peyote and a bottle of wine to make all of this take longer than 30 minutes. Also, you may find that the bleeding edge isn't the best place for people who need to be told exactly how to configure their own machines.
  • Ratman6161 - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Exactly

    "For the average person reading most of tech sites the more workstation benchmarks doesn't really makes sense."

    Counter point: The "more workstation benchmarks" and the tasks they represent are the reason this CPU exists in the first place. If you want a Ryzen and gaming is your primary use, you would be better off with something in the R7 family since when you disable half the cores, you effectively have the equivalent of an 1800x.

    The only reason game mode would exist is for someone who really needs to do those "more workstation" tasks for work purposes but also wants to to use the same machine for games when not doing actual work. IMO, the reviews should really stick even more to workstation use cases with gaming being an "oh, by the way, you can play games on it too" sort of deal.
  • Ian Cutress - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link

    https://myhacker.net | Hacking Tutorials | Hacking news | hacking tools | hacking ebooks
  • Gothmoth - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link

    waiting for anandtech praising the 8% on average performance boost of the 9000 intel cpu generation.... :-)
  • peevee - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    3%
  • peevee - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Been this way for the last 5 generations. Moore's law is over.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now