The AMD 3rd Gen Ryzen Deep Dive Review: 3700X and 3900X Raising The Bar
by Andrei Frumusanu & Gavin Bonshor on July 7, 2019 9:00 AM EST** = Old results marked were performed with the original BIOS & boost behaviour as published on 7/7.
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Rendering Tests
Rendering is often a key target for processor workloads, lending itself to a professional environment. It comes in different formats as well, from 3D rendering through rasterization, such as games, or by ray tracing, and invokes the ability of the software to manage meshes, textures, collisions, aliasing, physics (in animations), and discarding unnecessary work. Most renderers offer CPU code paths, while a few use GPUs and select environments use FPGAs or dedicated ASICs. For big studios however, CPUs are still the hardware of choice.
All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.
Corona 1.3: Performance Render
An advanced performance based renderer for software such as 3ds Max and Cinema 4D, the Corona benchmark renders a generated scene as a standard under its 1.3 software version. Normally the GUI implementation of the benchmark shows the scene being built, and allows the user to upload the result as a ‘time to complete’.
We got in contact with the developer who gave us a command line version of the benchmark that does a direct output of results. Rather than reporting time, we report the average number of rays per second across six runs, as the performance scaling of a result per unit time is typically visually easier to understand.
The Corona benchmark website can be found at https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark
LuxMark v3.1: LuxRender via Different Code Paths
As stated at the top, there are many different ways to process rendering data: CPU, GPU, Accelerator, and others. On top of that, there are many frameworks and APIs in which to program, depending on how the software will be used. LuxMark, a benchmark developed using the LuxRender engine, offers several different scenes and APIs.
Taken from the Linux Version of LuxMark
In our test, we run the simple ‘Ball’ scene on both the C++ and OpenCL code paths, but in CPU mode. This scene starts with a rough render and slowly improves the quality over two minutes, giving a final result in what is essentially an average ‘kilorays per second’.
POV-Ray 3.7.1: Ray Tracing
The Persistence of Vision ray tracing engine is another well-known benchmarking tool, which was in a state of relative hibernation until AMD released its Zen processors, to which suddenly both Intel and AMD were submitting code to the main branch of the open source project. For our test, we use the built-in benchmark for all-cores, called from the command line.
POV-Ray can be downloaded from http://www.povray.org/
Cinebench R15
The latest version of CineBench has also become one of those 'used everywhere' benchmarks, particularly as an indicator of single thread performance. High IPC and high frequency gives performance in ST, whereas having good scaling and many cores is where the MT test wins out.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
447 Comments
View All Comments
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
LOOOOOOL, so we have a guy confirming AMD doing fraund by misleading people about the frequency, instead of acknowledging the fraund, we gonna talk about semantics.Yeah, if you get sentenced for a sexual assault, you should sue then anyone who has accussed you of raping. Just wow.
Brilliant logic, sir.
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
*fraudQasar - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
still valid there buddy.. like has been said, you are the only one throwing the word fraud around, and that amd should be sued over this. so what everMaxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
And again... let me copy paste."You are uneducated, TDP doesn't mean power consumption or the highest peak but the amount of heat dissipated, it informs you how much of heat the cooler must be able to dissipate in order to keep the cpu cool enough to run.
Get it? 1700x TDP was 95W yet there were tasks it managed to consume 120 or even 140w on stock settings. Like do you even watch reviews? It was the same with 2700x.
but mimimimimimi AMD good mimimimimi Intel bad"
Korguz - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
and yet, you still refuse to admit, that intel has its own issues with fraud and misleading its own customers.does he actually say its fraud ?? not directly, seems only YOU keep saying that, and only YOU say amd should be sued for it. again.., i would love to see YOU file a suit against amd for it, considering you are so hung up about it but you wont, cause you are all talk, no action, and probably know.. you wouldnt get very far with that law suit
Maxiking - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
I said a few times... I don't tend to buy amd products so no, I am not gonna sue anybody.And as pointed out in the video, in his German one, he works for a retailer selling prebuilt pcs.. People keep returning pcs with AMD cpus becaue they do not boost to the promised frequency. You there, there are something like laws, if you write on the box 4.6ghz, it must reach it.
You are so knowledgeable, sharp minded and analytical when comes to meaning of words and what people want to say, you should sue Intel on your own, should be easy.
Korguz - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link
why not ?? going by how dead set you are about this.. seems like it would be an easy win for you.. ooooohhhh in the german one.. i understand now.. too bad i dont speak german so i cant confirm this... and if some one writes on the box that something uses a certain amount of power.. then it should use it.. not 50 to 100 watts more.. i have a few friends that buy intels cpus.. they see it uses 95 watts of power.. so they get a HSF that can dissipate that much power.. then wonder why their cpu throttles and runs slow when under load... then i point then to the link i just posted,and they are not happy.. and now need to go buy yet another HSF to handle the extra power.You are so knowledgeable, sharp minded and analytical when comes to meaning of words and what people want to say, you should sue Amd on your own, should be easy. again, too bad you wont.. cause you are all talk. have a good day sir..
Maxiking - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
Again, you have once again showed your AMD fanboyism.There is written: TDP 95W. I already explained what TDP means. AMD's TDP isn't accurate either.
AMD has 4.6ghz on the box whilst a bing number cpus does not REACH IT AT ALL. There is no "*" moniker next the 4.6ghz claim and they do not say that their cpu may not reach the frequency at all. In fact, there is a video from AMD on youtube promised even higher frequency, lol. Up to 4.75 ghz.
So yeah, stop being desperate and forcing Intel into the debate.
Because your childish attempts are futile, this is not about AMD or Intel. It is about us consumers. What will be next? 6 Ghz on the box?
Maxiking - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
AMD has 4.6ghz on the box whlist a big number of cpus do not REACH IT AT ALL under any load, conditions. Typing on phone is just cancer.Korguz - Thursday, July 25, 2019 - link
and again, like in another thread, you showed how much you hate amd, and are biased against them, and you call me an amd fanboy, you are just as much an intel fanboy. FYI, IF you actually READ the link i posted, you would see that intels 95 watts, is pretty much a MINIMUM their chips use, in reality, its more like 50 to 100 ABOVE that, and also.. amd is A LOT closer then intel is to the TDP they state, but again.. to be fair, amd AND intel use and come do different values for TDP, but you cant see passed your hated for amd to see this.. you are the one that has to resort to name calling, so WHO is being childish ?? what wil be next, intel claiming their cpus use 100 watts, but in reality, they use 300 ?