Analyzing 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. 

CPU Gaming Performance: Grand Theft Auto (1080p, 4K) Conclusions on Game Mode


View All Comments

  • silverblue - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    I'd like to see what happens when you manually set a 2+2+2+2 core configuration, instead of enabling Game Mode. From what I've read, Game Mode destroys memory bandwidth but yields better latency, however it's not answering whether Zen cores can really benefit from the extra bandwidth that a quad-channel memory interface affords.

    Alternatively, just clock the 1950 and 1920 identically, and see if the 1920's per-core performance is any higher.
  • KAlmquist - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    “One of the interesting data points in our test is the Compile. Because <B>this test requires a lot of cross-core communication</B> and DRAM, we get an interesting metric where the 1950X still comes out on top due to the core counts, but because the 1920X has fewer cores per CCX, it actually falls behind the 1950X in Game Mode and the 1800X despite having more cores.”

    Generally speaking, copmpilers are single threaded, so the parallelism in a software build comes from compiling multiple source files in parallel, meaning the cross-core communication is minimal. I have no idea what MSVC is doing here, can you explain? In any case, while I appreciate you including a software development benchmark, the one you've chosen would seem to provide no useful information to anyone who doesn't use MSVC.
  • peevee - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    I use MSVC and it scales pretty well if you are using it right. They are doing something wrong. Reply
  • KAlmquist - Saturday, August 19, 2017 - link

    Thanks. It makes sense that MSVC would scale about as well as any other build environment.

    ARS Technica also benchmarked a Chromium build, which I think uses MSVC, but uses the Google tools GN and Ninja to manage the build. They get:

    Ryzen 1800X (8 cores) - 9.8 build/day
    Threadripper 1920X (12 cores) - 16.7 build/day
    Threadripper 1950X (16 cores) - 18.6 build/day

    Very good speedup with the 1920X over the 1800X, but not so much going from the 1920X to the 1950X. Perhaps the benchmark is dependent on memory bandwidth and L3 cache.
  • Timur Born - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Thanks for the tests!

    I would have liked to see a combination of both being tested: Game Mode to switch off the second die and SMT disabled. That way 4 full physical cores with low latency memory access would have run the games.

    Hopefully modern titles don't benefit from this, but some more "legacy" ones might like this setup even more.
  • Timur Born - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Sorry, I meant 8 cores, aka 8/8 cores mode. Reply
  • mat9v - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    I wish someone had an inclination to test creative mode but with games pinned to one module. It is essentially NUMA mode but with all cores active.
    Or just enable SMT that is disabled in Gaming Mode - we actually then get a Ryzen 1800X CPU that overclocks well but with possibly higher performance due to all system task running on different module (if we configure system that way) and unencumbered access to more PCIEx lines.
  • peevee - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    Yes, that would be interesting.
    c:\>start /REALTIME /NODE 0 /AFFINITY 5555 you_game_here.exe
  • mat9v - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    I think I would start it on node 1 is anything since system task would be at default running on node 0.
    Mask 5555? Wouldn't it be AAAA - for 8 cores (8 threads) and FFFF for 8 cores (16 threads)?
  • peevee - Friday, August 18, 2017 - link

    The mask 5555 assumes that SMT is enabled. Otherwise it should be FF.

    When SMT is enabled, 5555 and AAAA will allocate threads to the same cores, just different logical CPUs.
    Where system threads will be run is system dependent, nothing prevents Windows from running them on NODE 1. /NODE 0 allows to run whether or not you actually have multiple NUMA nodes.

    With /REALTIME Windows will have hard time allocating anything on those logical CPUs, but can use the same cores with other logical CPUs, so yes, technically it will affect results. But unless you load it with something, the difference should not be significant - things like cache and memory bus contention are more important anyway and don't care on which cores you run.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now