The AMD 3rd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 3700X and 3900X Raising The Bar
by Andrei Frumusanu & Gavin Bonshor on July 7, 2019 9:00 AM EST** = Old results marked were performed with the original BIOS & boost behaviour as published on 7/7.
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding Tests
With the rise of streaming, vlogs, and video content as a whole, encoding and transcoding tests are becoming ever more important. Not only are more home users and gamers needing to convert video files into something more manageable, for streaming or archival purposes, but the servers that manage the output also manage around data and log files with compression and decompression. Our encoding tasks are focused around these important scenarios, with input from the community for the best implementation of real-world testing.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Handbrake 1.1.0: Streaming and Archival Video Transcoding
A popular open source tool, Handbrake is the anything-to-anything video conversion software that a number of people use as a reference point. The danger is always on version numbers and optimization, for example the latest versions of the software can take advantage of AVX-512 and OpenCL to accelerate certain types of transcoding and algorithms. The version we use here is a pure CPU play, with common transcoding variations.
We have split Handbrake up into several tests, using a Logitech C920 1080p60 native webcam recording (essentially a streamer recording), and convert them into two types of streaming formats and one for archival. The output settings used are:
- 720p60 at 6000 kbps constant bit rate, fast setting, high profile
- 1080p60 at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile
- 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile
7-zip v1805: Popular Open-Source Encoding Engine
Out of our compression/decompression tool tests, 7-zip is the most requested and comes with a built-in benchmark. For our test suite, we’ve pulled the latest version of the software and we run the benchmark from the command line, reporting the compression, decompression, and a combined score.
It is noted in this benchmark that the latest multi-die processors have very bi-modal performance between compression and decompression, performing well in one and badly in the other. There are also discussions around how the Windows Scheduler is implementing every thread. As we get more results, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
(Please note, if you plan to share the Compression graph, we'd appreciate it if you could please include the Decompression graph as well. Otherwise you’re only presenting half of the picture)
WinRAR 5.60b3: Archiving Tool
My compression tool of choice is often WinRAR, having been one of the first tools a number of my generation used over two decades ago. The interface has not changed much, although the integration with Windows right click commands is always a plus. It has no in-built test, so we run a compression over a set directory containing over thirty 60-second video files and 2000 small web-based files at a normal compression rate.
WinRAR is variable threaded but also susceptible to caching, so in our test we run it 10 times and take the average of the last five, leaving the test purely for raw CPU compute performance.
AES Encryption: File Security
A number of platforms, particularly mobile devices, are now offering encryption by default with file systems in order to protect the contents. Windows based devices have these options as well, often applied by BitLocker or third-party software. In our AES encryption test, we used the discontinued TrueCrypt for its built-in benchmark, which tests several encryption algorithms directly in memory.
The data we take for this test is the combined AES encrypt/decrypt performance, measured in gigabytes per second. The software does use AES commands for processors that offer hardware selection, however not AVX-512.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
447 Comments
View All Comments
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
LOOOOOOL, so we have a guy confirming AMD doing fraund by misleading people about the frequency, instead of acknowledging the fraund, we gonna talk about semantics.Yeah, if you get sentenced for a sexual assault, you should sue then anyone who has accussed you of raping. Just wow.
Brilliant logic, sir.
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
*fraudQasar - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
still valid there buddy.. like has been said, you are the only one throwing the word fraud around, and that amd should be sued over this. so what everMaxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
And again... let me copy paste."You are uneducated, TDP doesn't mean power consumption or the highest peak but the amount of heat dissipated, it informs you how much of heat the cooler must be able to dissipate in order to keep the cpu cool enough to run.
Get it? 1700x TDP was 95W yet there were tasks it managed to consume 120 or even 140w on stock settings. Like do you even watch reviews? It was the same with 2700x.
but mimimimimimi AMD good mimimimimi Intel bad"
Korguz - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
and yet, you still refuse to admit, that intel has its own issues with fraud and misleading its own customers.does he actually say its fraud ?? not directly, seems only YOU keep saying that, and only YOU say amd should be sued for it. again.., i would love to see YOU file a suit against amd for it, considering you are so hung up about it but you wont, cause you are all talk, no action, and probably know.. you wouldnt get very far with that law suit
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
I said a few times... I don't tend to buy amd products so no, I am not gonna sue anybody.And as pointed out in the video, in his German one, he works for a retailer selling prebuilt pcs.. People keep returning pcs with AMD cpus becaue they do not boost to the promised frequency. You there, there are something like laws, if you write on the box 4.6ghz, it must reach it.
You are so knowledgeable, sharp minded and analytical when comes to meaning of words and what people want to say, you should sue Intel on your own, should be easy.
Korguz - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
why not ?? going by how dead set you are about this.. seems like it would be an easy win for you.. ooooohhhh in the german one.. i understand now.. too bad i dont speak german so i cant confirm this... and if some one writes on the box that something uses a certain amount of power.. then it should use it.. not 50 to 100 watts more.. i have a few friends that buy intels cpus.. they see it uses 95 watts of power.. so they get a HSF that can dissipate that much power.. then wonder why their cpu throttles and runs slow when under load... then i point then to the link i just posted,and they are not happy.. and now need to go buy yet another HSF to handle the extra power.You are so knowledgeable, sharp minded and analytical when comes to meaning of words and what people want to say, you should sue Amd on your own, should be easy. again, too bad you wont.. cause you are all talk. have a good day sir..
Maxiking - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
Again, you have once again showed your AMD fanboyism.There is written: TDP 95W. I already explained what TDP means. AMD's TDP isn't accurate either.
AMD has 4.6ghz on the box whilst a bing number cpus does not REACH IT AT ALL. There is no "*" moniker next the 4.6ghz claim and they do not say that their cpu may not reach the frequency at all. In fact, there is a video from AMD on youtube promised even higher frequency, lol. Up to 4.75 ghz.
So yeah, stop being desperate and forcing Intel into the debate.
Because your childish attempts are futile, this is not about AMD or Intel. It is about us consumers. What will be next? 6 Ghz on the box?
Maxiking - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
AMD has 4.6ghz on the box whlist a big number of cpus do not REACH IT AT ALL under any load, conditions. Typing on phone is just cancer.Korguz - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
and again, like in another thread, you showed how much you hate amd, and are biased against them, and you call me an amd fanboy, you are just as much an intel fanboy. FYI, IF you actually READ the link i posted, you would see that intels 95 watts, is pretty much a MINIMUM their chips use, in reality, its more like 50 to 100 ABOVE that, and also.. amd is A LOT closer then intel is to the TDP they state, but again.. to be fair, amd AND intel use and come do different values for TDP, but you cant see passed your hated for amd to see this.. you are the one that has to resort to name calling, so WHO is being childish ?? what wil be next, intel claiming their cpus use 100 watts, but in reality, they use 300 ?