Retesting AMD Ryzen Threadripper’s Game Mode: Halving Cores for More Performance
by Ian Cutress on August 17, 2017 12:01 PM ESTCPU 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
104 Comments
View All Comments
ddriver - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link
Why not? We've had 16 core CPUs long before W10 was launched, and it has allegedly been heavily updated since then.But it is NOT the "coder"'s responsibility. Programmers don't get any say, they are paid workers, paid to do as they are told. Not that I don't have the impression that a lot of the code that's being written is below the standard, but the actual decision making is not a product of software programmers but that of software architects, and the latter are even more atrocious than the actual programmers.
HollyDOL - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link
Sadly, the reality is much worse... those architects are ordered by managers, economic persons etc. who, sadly often, don't know more about computer than where's power button. And they want products with minimal cost and 'yesterday was late'.ddriver - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link
Well, yeah, the higher you go up the latter the grosser the incompetence level.BrokenCrayons - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
Interesting test results. I think they demonstrate pretty clearly why Threadripper isn't really a very good option for pure gaming workloads. The big takeaway is that there are more affordable processors with lower TDPs offer comparable or better performance without adding additional settings that few people will realize exist and even fewer people will fiddle with enough to determine which settings actually improve performance in their particular software library. The Ryzen 7 series is probably a much better overall choice than TR right now if you don't have specific tasks that require all those cores and threads.Gothmoth - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
"I think they demonstrate pretty clearly why Threadripper isn't really a very good option for pure gaming workloads."wow.... what a surprise.
thanks for pointing that out mr. obvious. :-)
Gigaplex - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
These are single GPU tests. Threadripper has enough PCIe lanes to do large multi GPU systems. More GPU usually trumps better CPU in the high end gaming scene, especially with 4k resolution.BrokenCrayons - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link
Yes, but multi-GPU setups are generally not used for gaming-centric operations. There's been tacit acknowledgement of this as the state of things by NV since the release of the 10x0 series. Features like Crossfire and SLI support are barely a bullet point in marketing materials these days. With good reason since game support is waning as well and DX12 is positioned to pretty nail the multi-GPU coffin shut entirely except in corner cases where it MIGHT be possible to leverage an iGPU alongside a dGPU if a game engine developer bothers to invest time into banging out code to support it. That places TR's generous PCIe lane count and the potential multi-GPU usage in the domain of professional workloads that need GPU compute power.Bullwinkle J Moose - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
I agree with ddriverWe should not have to fiddle with the settings and reboot to game mode on these things
Windows should handle the hardware seamlessly in the background for whatever end use we put these systems to
The problem is getting Microsoft to let the end users use the full potential of our hardware
If the framework for the hardware is not fully implemented in the O.S., every "FIX" looks a bit like the one AMD is using here
I think gaming on anything over 4 cores might require a "proper" update from Microsoft working with the hardware manufacturers
Sometimes it might be nice to use the full potential of the systems we have instead of Microsoft deciding that all of our problems can be fixed with another cloud service
Gothmoth - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
but but.. what about linux.i mean linux is the savior, not?
it has not won a 2.2% marketshare on teh desktop for nothing.
sarcasm off....
HomeworldFound - Thursday, August 17, 2017 - link
What can we expect Microsoft to do prior to a product like this launching. If a processor operates in a manner that requires the operating system to be adjusted, the company selling it needs to approach Microsoft and provide an implementation, and it should be ready for launch. If that isn't possible then why manufacture something that doesn't work correctly and requires hacky fixes to run.