Professional Visualization and Rendering

With AMD strongly pushing the Radeon VII as a prosumer content creation card, it behooves us to look at rendering, CAD, and professional visualization performance. However, accurate and applicable benchmarks for this field are not so easy to find, especially since performance is highly dependent on workflow and proprietary licensed ISV software. Given AnandTech’s audience, which often includes engineers using these applications in critical production environments, our goal is to provide the most relevant metrics. However, as Ian has discussed previously, the route to the most accurate workstation benchmarking for professional applications is in the hands of ISVs, who are at best blasé and more typically negative about providing access, even at the prospect of lending limited software licenses in return for ongoing discussion and third-party benchmark data of their software.

Those caveats in mind, the next best thing for evaluating overall GPU workstation performance is the venerable SPECviewperf, recently updated to version 13. Separated into ‘viewsets,’ which are a group of application-specific workloads derived from real-world datasets, SPECviewperf has been a longstanding suite for generalized workstation/CAD GPU performance. For SPECviewperf 13, the viewsets are based on:

  • Autodesk 3ds Max 2016 (Nitrous DX11 driver)
  • Dassault Systèmes CATIA V6 R2012
  • PTC Creo 3 & Creo 4
  • Geosurvey software, with workloads based on rendering techniques utilized by the open-source OpendTect seismic visualization application
  • Autodesk Maya 2017
  • Radiological (i.e. CT, MRI scans) rendering, with workloads using the Tuvok rendering core of the ImageVis3D volume visualization application
  • Autodesk Showcase 2013
  • Siemens NX 8.0
  • Dassault Systèmes Solidworks 2013 SP1

While we didn’t have time for complete benchmarking of video editing/production software such as Adobe Premiere Pro CC, we will be looking to include that in the future.

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - 3dsmax-06

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - catia-05

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - creo-02

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - energy-02

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - maya-05

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - medical-02

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - showcase-02

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - snx-03 (Siemens NX)

Compute/ProViz: SPECviewperf 13 - sw-04 (Solidworks)

Looking over the results, it's clear that certain viewsets tend to perform better on one vendor's hardware than the other's. In those cases, the Radeon VII doesn't buck the trend, though in Siemens NX the lower performance is more likely than not related to driver maturity. In the reverse scenarios like in creo-02 or maya-05, the Radeon VII is in a similar spot, naturally ahead of the RX Vega 64 but behind the competing RTX and GTX cards. If anything, the results highlight the importance of software maturity for newer hardware, but there are definite signs of Vega 20 being a powerful workstation card. The caveat is that it doesn't seem to change the overall landscape for worksets that traditionally perform well on NVIDIA hardware.

Our next set of benchmarks look at rendering performance. To be clear, given the nature of ‘render wars’ as well as the adoption of CUDA, the featured render engines are not necessarily indicative of the overall GPU renderer landscape. Because we are looking at the Radeon VII, it’s not applicable to include some of the more popular renderers, such as Redshift and Octane, which are CUDA-only, and similarly the presence of Indigo Renderer helps as another datapoint even though it is less popular.

Compute/ProViz: LuxMark 3.1 - LuxBall and Hotel

Compute/ProViz: Cycles - Blender Benchmark 1.0b2

Compute/ProViz: V-Ray Benchmark 1.0.8

Compute/ProViz: Indigo Renderer 4 - IndigoBench 4.0.64

To note, official Blender releases have yet to incorporate CUDA 10, and so RTX 20 series cards are not officially supported.

V-RAY here is the only test that utilizes CUDA for NVIDIA cards, while the rest all use OpenCL. The results seem broadly similar to SPECviewperf, where the Radeon VII continues to excel at workloads where AMD hardware generally fare well.

Synthetics Radeon VII and RX Vega 64 Clock-for-Clock
Comments Locked

289 Comments

View All Comments

  • tipoo - Sunday, February 10, 2019 - link

    It's MI50
  • vanilla_gorilla - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    As a linux prosumer user who does light gaming, this card is a slam dunk for me.
  • LogitechFan - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    and a noisy one at that
  • BaneSilvermoon - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Meh, I went looking for a 16GB card about a week before they announced Radeon VII because gaming was using up all 8gb of VRAM and 14gb of system RAM. This card is a no brainer upgrade from my Vega 64.
  • LogitechFan - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    lemme guess, you're playing sandstorm?
  • Gastec - Tuesday, February 12, 2019 - link

    I was beginning to think that the "money" was in crytocurrency mining with video cards but I guess after the €1500+ RTX 2080Ti I should reconsider :)
  • eddman - Thursday, February 7, 2019 - link

    Perhaps but Turing is also a new architecture, so it's probable it'd get better with newer drivers too.

    Maxwell is from 2014 and still performs as it should.

    As for GPU-accelerated gameworks, obviously nvidia is optimizing it for their own cards only, but that doesn't mean they actively modify the code to make it perform worse on AMD cards; not to mention it would be illegal. (GPU-only gameworks effects can be disabled in game options if need be)

    Many (most?) games just utilize the CPU-only gameworks modules; no performance difference between cards.
  • ccfly - Tuesday, February 12, 2019 - link

    you joking right ?
    1st game they did just that is crysis (they hide modely under water so ati card will render these too
    and be slower
    and after that they cheat full time ...
  • eddman - Tuesday, February 12, 2019 - link

    No, I'm not.

    There was no proof of misconduct in crysis 2's case, just baseless rumors.

    For all we know, it was an oversight on crytek's part. Also, DX11 was an optional feature, meaning it wasn't part of game's main code, as I've stated.
  • eddman - Tuesday, February 12, 2019 - link

    ... I mean an optional toggle for crysis 2. The game could be run in DX9 mode.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now