Retesting AMD Ryzen Threadripper’s Game Mode: Halving Cores for More Performance
by Ian Cutress on August 17, 2017 12:01 PM ESTAnalyzing Creator Mode and Game Mode
In this review, we posted every graph with both the Creator Mode results (as default) and the Game Mode results (as 1950X-GM) for the Threadripper 1950X. There were a number of trends worth pointing out.
The first big answer is that in (almost) every multi threaded benchmark that relied on all the threads pushing out data, Game Mode scored considerably less than Creator Mode. In our test suite, I earmarked 19 different tests that are designed to scale with thread count, and the results ranged from +1% (Octane) down to -48% (Corona) and -45% (LuxMark). To summarize, anything that wanted serious throughput, Game Mode was not the right mode to be in. But anyone could have told you that.
The next element is the single threaded tests in the suite. There are 10 of these if we include the four legacy benchmarks, and for the most part these are all within 5% of the Creator Mode results – some are above and some are below, but nothing majorly drastic. Two of the benchmarks, however, did get significant jumps from using Game Mode: Dolphin (+9%) and Agisoft Stage 3 (+38%). Agisoft is probably a hollow victory as overall that test only gains by 1%.
We do run a few variable threaded loads, and the results here really depend on how much of a parallel task it is. As stated before, Agisoft goes up 1%, and perhaps surprisingly our Compile benchmark goes down 14%. One would have thought that the faster memory latency of Game Mode might counteract the lack of threads, especially when the L3 victim cache is of little use, but overall it would seem that our compile test likes the threads instead. WinRAR is a known memory-loving test, so Game Mode picked up a 3% win, and the web benchmarks that are variable threaded such as WebXPRT also picked up a 9% win.
CPU Gaming Tests
Now we turn to our gaming tests. Because we test six different games with four different GPUs at two different resolutions, and in each case take averages and 99th percentiles, I’m going to present this data in a set of different ways. First, the overall gains based on the resolution:
Game Mode Gains Over Creative Mode | ||
1080p | 4K | |
Average | +0.6% | +0.6% |
99th | +14.3% | +8.0% |
The two elements we can draw here are that Game Mode is beneficial mostly for 99th percentiles, but also it affects 1080p gaming over 4K gaming more.
This next table breaks it down by graphics card:
Game Mode Gains Over Creative Mode | ||
NVIDIA GTX 1080 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -3.1% | 0.0% |
99th | +1.6% | +1.9% |
NVIDIA GTX 1060 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -0.6% | +0.1% |
99th | +3.1% | +1.9% |
AMD R9 Fury | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +2.5% | +1.5% |
99th | +26.2% | +14.4% |
AMD RX 480 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +3.6% | +0.6% |
99th | +25.0% | +14.1% |
Again, the data shows that 99th percentiles fare better over averages, although the AMD cards get a better uplift than the NVIDIA cards.
Now let us break it down by game tests.
Game Mode Gains Over Creative Mode | ||
Civilization 6 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -2.1% | -1.8% |
99th | -5.3% | -3.1% |
Ashes of the Singularity | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -3.2% | -0.1% |
99th | -2.2% | -0.6% |
Shadow of Mordor | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -0.3% | 0.0% |
99th | -4.5% | +0.1% |
Both Civilization 6 and Ashes of The Singularity slight decreases running in Game Mode, with 4K Civilization even regresses 5% in 99th percentile data. Shadow of Mordor has some gains at 4K, mainly with 99th percentile data, but well within the margin of error.
Game Mode Gains Over Creative Mode | ||
RoTR-1 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | -1.3% | +0.1% |
99th | +4.2% | +0.4% |
RoTR-2 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +2.4% | +1.8% |
99th | +43.7% | +21.9% |
RoTR-3 | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +2.3% | +1.4% |
99th | +17.9% | +11.7% |
Rise of the Tomb Raider has three test stages, and almost all of them benefit from Game Mode. Again, 99th percentiles go up (+43.7% for the Prophets Tomb test), and 1080p gets the better deal over 4K data.
Game Mode Gains Over Creative Mode | ||
Rocket League | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +0.8% | +1.0% |
99th | +9.1% | +2.9% |
Grand Theft Auto V | 1080p | 4K |
Average | +6.9% | +2.2% |
99th | +49.2% | +29.4% |
The last two games are Rocket League and Grand Theft Auto, with Rocket League getting a small bump in 99th percentiles but GTA jumps up double digits. For GTA, those big number spikes at 1080p come from ~100% gains on AMD cards. Similarly at 4K, while NVIDIA cards get nearly no benefit, AMD cards gain 50-73%.
Conclusions on CPU Gaming
Looking at the overall data, the worst loss was a -10% at 4K for Civilization 6, and it's almost a complete mix of positive and negative results across the 256 data points we tested. The takeaway is that on average Game Mode affects certain games really, really well, like RoTR and GTA, but not games like Ashes or Shadow of Mordor. On average that equates to a +8% boost in 99th percentile frame rates at 4K or a +14% boost in 99th percentile frame rates at 1080p, and mostly limited to AMD cards.
If a user wants to use Threadripper to play certain games when using an AMD card, they should be in Game Mode. There are some losses in some titles, but as a catch all situation, the gains for games where it does work are noticable, espeically at lower resolutions.
How Does it Compare to How We Tested on 16C/16T
Interestingly, the results for almost all benchmarks were lower in 8C/16T mode over 16C/16T mode. Despite moving down to a single die worth of cores, it would appear that having the raw cores at the disposal counteracts most of the cross communication losses, especially if each die of cores preferentially communicates with its own DRAM channels where possible.
In the following table,
On the left is AMD's Game Mode vs Creative Mode.
On the right is SMT disabled vs Creative Mode.
Both non-Creative data sets have NUMA enabled.
For example, at 16C/16T we saw a +4% average FPS improvement at 1080p, but now at 8C/16T this is only 0.6%. Before we had a +26.5% gain in 99th percentile numbers at 1080p, but now this is only +14.3%. The individual game numbers are matched similarly - on the right at 1080p at 16C/16T, we get an ~0.1% difference in the results for Game Mode compared to Creator mode, but on the left at 8C/16T we see an average loss of 3% for some of the tests. In the pure CPU benchmarks, at 16C/16T some benchmarks like Dolphin had a +33% increase, but at 8C/16T it is only a +9% increase.
The only upside to running at 8C/16T over 16C/16T would seem to be power consumption. In 8C/16T Game Mode, we saw an all-thread power consumption of 125W. In the non-SMT mode, this was 170W, closer to the default Creative Mode of 177W. One of AMD's reasons for implementing Game Mode like this was due to certain games not accepting the number of threads on offer - in the situations above, both of the new modes tested have 16 threads, at which point disabling SMT would appear to be preferable for performance.
104 Comments
View All Comments
Ian Cutress - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link
Visit https://myhacker.net For Latest Hacking & security updates.Glock24 - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link
Ha your account bee hacked Ian? This seems like an out of place comment from a spam bot.zodiacfml - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link
Useless. Why cripple an expensive chip? It is already mentioend that the value of high core counts is mega tasking, like rendering while gaming. I wouldn't be to tell a increase in of 10% or less in performance but I will do for multi-tasking.Greyscend - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link
To summarize, I can pay $1000 for a new and crazy powerful CPU that gives me the option to turn $500 of it off so that I can sporadically gain performance in games at a level that is mostly equal to or below the level of standard testing deviations? Worth.Greyscend - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link
I want competition in the CPU market so I feel like AMD should consider redistributing funds from what can only be described as the "Gimmicks Department" back to the actual processor R&D department. Although, the Gimmicks Department is getting pretty good at UI development. Look at the software they churned out that turns $500 of your CPU off! It's beautiful! They also seem to be getting bolder since they asked Anandtech to effectively re-write an entire article in order to more succinctly point out how consumers can effectively disable half of the CPU cores they paid for with almost no discernible real world effect. Pretty impressive considering the number of consumers who seem genuinely interested in this type of feature.Oxford Guy - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link
"research is paramount"Yeah, like the common knowledge that Zen reviews shouldn't be handicapped by only testing them with slow RAM.
Joel Hruska at ExtremeTech tested Ryzen on day 1 with 3200 speed RAM. Tom's tested the latest batch of consumer Zen (Ryzen 3) with 3200.
And yet... this site has apparently just discovered why it's so important to not kneecap Zen with slow RAM — as if we're using ECC for enterprise stuff all the time.
Gastec - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link
Why such abysmal performance in Rise of the Tomb Raider and GTA5 for Sapphire Nitro R9 and RX480 with Thradripper CPU's?Oxford Guy - Thursday, August 24, 2017 - link
I can't say I'm an expert on this subject but it looks like their tested games generally are a list of some of the poorer performers on AMD. Tomb Raider, GTA5, etc.Dirt 4, by contrast, shows Vega 56 beating a 1080 Ti at Tech Report.
dwade123 - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link
Threadripper is a mess. There's always a compromise with AMD.mapesdhs - Sunday, August 20, 2017 - link
Because of course X299 doesn't involve aaany compromise at all. :D