The AMD 2nd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive: The 2700X, 2700, 2600X, and 2600 Tested
by Ian Cutress on April 19, 2018 9:00 AM ESTCPU Legacy Tests
Our legacy tests represent benchmarks that were once at the height of their time. Some of these are industry standard synthetics, and we have data going back over 10 years. All of the data here has been rerun on Windows 10, and we plan to go back several generations of components to see how performance has evolved.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
3D Particle Movement v1
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.
CineBench 11.5 and 10
Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.
x264 HD 3.0
Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
545 Comments
View All Comments
mapesdhs - Monday, May 14, 2018 - link
You know what will happen there though, yet more accusations of conspiracy, etc.lfred - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Could anyone confirm the Wraith Prism cooler height 9.4cm , (and therefore wont fit a Silverstone Raven Z Mini-ITX case ) . thank youpsychok9 - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Hello Ian, is there any news this week?ET - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
I'm still waiting for the StoreMI page.Sx57 - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Well i am still waiting for anandtech updating the article.i am very interested to know how ryzen beat coffelake so well.i believe anandtech review is perfomed rightly but i wanna know what is actually wrong with other reviews that make intel winner in some games.it seems not to be the security patches related.FaultierSid - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Did they just silently switch out all gaming benchmarks? Intel 8700K now winning across the board.rocky12345 - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Yep they sure did they must have redone the tsts but this time turned on MCE for Intel and upped the memory clock to at least 3200MHz for Intel as well to see those kinds of gains in games from the old charts from last week. If they decide to explain it they will spin it that oh they had the wrong data points in the charts for Intel...lolTEAMSWITCHER - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Yes .. at 1080P. The 4K gaming results are rather mixed. So the original conclusion still stands for me. The AMD Ryzen 2700X is roughly on par with the 8700K at 4K gaming, and pulls ahead in productivity applications.RafaelHerschel - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link
Here is how I see it, at 1080p the new Ryzen results are good enough for 60 FPS gaming. The 2600 (non-x model) sometimes drops below 60 FPS but for a system that is equally used for productivity and gaming, I can certainly live with that. For a system that is mainly used for gaming, I still prefer Intel, but by a slimmer margin than before.mapesdhs - Monday, May 14, 2018 - link
You are hereby awarded the Sensible Chap medal for mentioning 60Hz gaming in at least a non-negtive manner. 8) A few pages back, one guy described anything below 144Hz as useless.