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 Office Tests
The office programs we use for benchmarking aren't specific programs per-se, but industry standard tests that hold weight with professionals. The goal of these tests is to use an array of software and techniques that a typical office user might encounter, such as video conferencing, document editing, architectural modelling, and so on and so forth.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Chromium Compile (v56)
Our new compilation test uses Windows 10 Pro, VS Community 2015.3 with the Win10 SDK to combile a nightly build of Chromium. We've fixed the test for a build in late March 2017, and we run a fresh full compile in our test. Compilation is the typical example given of a variable threaded workload - some of the compile and linking is linear, whereas other parts are multithreaded.
Having redone our compile testing, we can see that the new Ryzen-2000 series parts do provide a good uplift over the first generation, likely due to the decreased cache latencies and better precision boost. Performance per dollar between the 8700K and the 2700X would seem to be about equal as well.
PCMark8: link
Despite originally coming out in 2008/2009, Futuremark has maintained PCMark8 to remain relevant in 2017. On the scale of complicated tasks, PCMark focuses more on the low-to-mid range of professional workloads, making it a good indicator for what people consider 'office' work. We run the benchmark from the commandline in 'conventional' mode, meaning C++ over OpenCL, to remove the graphics card from the equation and focus purely on the CPU. PCMark8 offers Home, Work and Creative workloads, with some software tests shared and others unique to each benchmark set.
PCMark 10
GeekBench4
If you live and breathe GeekBench 4, then the single threaded results put Intel firmly in first place. For the multi-threaded tests, the top Intel and AMD mainstream parts are going at it almost neck-and-neck, however it is clear that the previous generation quad-cores are falling behind.
545 Comments
View All Comments
ComposingCoder - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
just an FYI, they tested on different settings..... Toms Hardware for example used High on civ VI vs ultra that was used here.fallaha56 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Try techradar who actually patchedThey too are showing massive Intel hits
RafaelHerschel - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Correct me if I'm wrong, but TechRadar seems to have tested only two games and provides minimal information on how they tested. Plus, Intel is still a bit faster in their tests.fallaha56 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Look at the geekbench scoresThey also include ‘before and after’ Spectre2 patches for Intel
The reliance of Intel on prefetch is well-known and now it’s busted
Crazyeyeskillah - Friday, April 20, 2018 - link
AMD hardware crushes intel on GEEKBENCH. You have to look at all tests together, and never focus on one test, unless that is the only thing you are buying your processor for, like gaming, or video encoding.sardaukar - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
There's no need to be a dick about it.SkyBill40 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Burden of proof fallacy?ACTIVATE!
xidex2 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
So you are now Intel engineer or what? How do you know what impact those patches have on Intel CPUs? Get a grip and delete these childish comments.RafaelHerschel - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
I'll add Hardware Unboxed on YouTube.ACE76 - Thursday, April 19, 2018 - link
Anandtech isn't the only one to have come to this conclusion bud.