The AMD Threadripper 2 CPU Review: The 24-Core 2970WX and 12-Core 2920X Tested
by Ian Cutress on October 29, 2018 9:00 AM ESTHEDT Performance: Encoding Tests
With the rise of streaming, vlogs, and video content as a whole, encoding and transcoding tests are becoming ever more important. Not only are more home users and gamers needing to convert video files into something more manageable, for streaming or archival purposes, but the servers that manage the output also manage around data and log files with compression and decompression. Our encoding tasks are focused around these important scenarios, with input from the community for the best implementation of real-world testing.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Handbrake 1.1.0: Streaming and Archival Video Transcoding
A popular open source tool, Handbrake is the anything-to-anything video conversion software that a number of people use as a reference point. The danger is always on version numbers and optimization, for example the latest versions of the software can take advantage of AVX-512 and OpenCL to accelerate certain types of transcoding and algorithms. The version we use here is a pure CPU play, with common transcoding variations.
We have split Handbrake up into several tests, using a Logitech C920 1080p60 native webcam recording (essentially a streamer recording), and convert them into two types of streaming formats and one for archival. The output settings used are:
- 720p60 at 6000 kbps constant bit rate, fast setting, high profile
- 1080p60 at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile
- 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile
Our encoding tests seem to be very memory dependent as the core count is increased, and the increased core-to-core traffic doesn't help either.
7-zip v1805: Popular Open-Source Encoding Engine
Out of our compression/decompression tool tests, 7-zip is the most requested and comes with a built-in benchmark. For our test suite, we’ve pulled the latest version of the software and we run the benchmark from the command line, reporting the compression, decompression, and a combined score.
It is noted in this benchmark that the latest multi-die processors have very bi-modal performance between compression and decompression, performing well in one and badly in the other. There are also discussions around how the Windows Scheduler is implementing every thread. As we get more results, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Please note, if you plan to share out the Compression graph, please include the Decompression one. Otherwise you’re only presenting half a picture.
Intel wins on compression, AMD wins on decompression.
WinRAR 5.60b3: Archiving Tool
My compression tool of choice is often WinRAR, having been one of the first tools a number of my generation used over two decades ago. The interface has not changed much, although the integration with Windows right click commands is always a plus. It has no in-built test, so we run a compression over a set directory containing over thirty 60-second video files and 2000 small web-based files at a normal compression rate.
WinRAR is variable threaded but also susceptible to caching, so in our test we run it 10 times and take the average of the last five, leaving the test purely for raw CPU compute performance.
AES Encryption: File Security
A number of platforms, particularly mobile devices, are now offering encryption by default with file systems in order to protect the contents. Windows based devices have these options as well, often applied by BitLocker or third-party software. In our AES encryption test, we used the discontinued TrueCrypt for its built-in benchmark, which tests several encryption algorithms directly in memory.
The data we take for this test is the combined AES encrypt/decrypt performance, measured in gigabytes per second. The software does use AES commands for processors that offer hardware selection, however not AVX-512.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
69 Comments
View All Comments
lilmoe - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
Instead of all the 10+ pages of gaming benchmarks and client side javascript for a platform that most probably won't be used solely for gaming or casual content works, wouldn't it be better to have a suit of server side based benchmarks that are more server oriented? These platforms are becoming very attractive for development and testing of server side applications:- gzip
- pdf conversion
- database transactions
- modern web services
- node.js
etc, etc...
I really see no real value in gaming benchmarks. Not for this platform.
mapesdhs - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
You might not see the value, but your desire does not reflect that of others, and there's no harm in the data points. You're right though that server side testing would be good, but is this site really the right place for that kind of testing? And from what I've read in the past it can be rather more complicated to run those kinds of tests. AT has a wide audience; they have to think more broadly about to whom they can or should appeal.Howeverm you're wrong in one regard, the cost of the 12-core inparticular to me looks like a rather nice alternative for those wanting decent gaming performance at 1440p or higher, but also good productivity potential. Given its cost, seems like an ideal streaming/gaming/productivity all-rounder to me.
DominionSeraph - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
i9 9900k would be a better choice. It splits the heavily multithreaded benchmarks with the 12 core, is $160 cheaper for the CPU, and doesn't require a $400 motherboard.eva02langley - Tuesday, October 30, 2018 - link
Techspot takes.''We didn’t have time to retest the Core i9-7900X, but I can assure you with the data we have on hand the 2920X also dominates that part as well, mostly because the 10-core Intel CPU costs over 40% more. That just leaves the 9900K, and honestly, if productivity tasks are the focus then we believe the 2920X is the smarter buy. It will end up costing a little more overall but for applications that utilize the 12-core Threadripper CPU well, a heavily overclocked 9900K will melt trying to keep up.''
TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, October 30, 2018 - link
The i9 9900k would spend its time melting down under water cooling attempting to keep up, while costing more after the cooling solution then threadripper costs.Icehawk - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
Please provide your full Handbrake settings (IMO it should be linked in the article), you get about 3x faster encoding than I do at “Fast, Main, 3500kbs”. I’d love to triple my throughput.mapesdhs - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
It's amazing how some options in Handbrake can cut performane in half. I've been meddling with it a lot today, certain filters can really slow things down.rony_ph - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
Hello,With all these threadripper tests, how come we never see any reference or use case scenarios for Virtualization. Those CPUs with with this amount of cores, can easily be used to host multiple VMs, etc... yet all the testing is mainly on Office Apps, Gaming and 3D but never on virtualization and the advantage of having such a CPU would do for these scenarios... I'm certain that there are tons of people using those chips to run VMware & Hyper-V, etc...
schujj07 - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
You wouldn't use these for VMware or Hyper-V to run mission critical VMs. You might use VMware Workstation with them to run Sandbox systems.rony_ph - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
Never mentioned mission critical systems. As hone or power user. A cpu like 2990w or 2970w will easily let you have 60+ vms running in parallel to do your own testing and lab environment. While buying an equivalent from intel for same price range (not talking about Xeon) wont let u make half as much VMs. You can even probably run an azure stack on it for testing purposes. So the use of such a CPU is huge for an IT Pro for instance.