CPU Benchmark Performance: Simulation And Encoding

Simulation and Science have a lot of overlap in the benchmarking world, however for this distinction we’re separating into two segments mostly based on the utility of the resulting data. The benchmarks that fall under Science have a distinct use for the data they output – in our Simulation section, these act more like synthetics but at some level are still trying to simulate a given environment.

One of the interesting elements on modern processors is encoding performance. This covers two main areas: encryption/decryption for secure data transfer, and video transcoding from one video format to another.

In the encrypt/decrypt scenario, how data is transferred and by what mechanism is pertinent to on-the-fly encryption of sensitive data - a process by which more modern devices are leaning to for software security.

Video transcoding as a tool to adjust the quality, file size and resolution of a video file has boomed in recent years, such as providing the optimum video for devices before consumption, or for game streamers who are wanting to upload the output from their video camera in real-time. As we move into live 3D video, this task will only get more strenuous, and it turns out that the performance of certain algorithms is a function of the input/output of the content.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X, as well as Intel's 12th Gen (Alder Lake) processors at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5200 CL44 - Ryzen 7000
  • DDR5-4800 (B) CL40 - Intel 12th Gen

All other CPUs such as Ryzen 5000 and 3000 were tested at the relevant JEDEC settings as per the processor's individual memory support with DDR4.

Simulation

(3-2a) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 65x65, 250 Yr

(3-2b) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 129x129, 550 Yr

(3-2c) Dwarf Fortress 0.44.12 World Gen 257x257, 550 Yr

(3-4a) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 10K Trains

(3-4b) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 10K Belts

(3-4c) Factorio v1.1.26 Test, 20K Hybrid

Starting with the Dwarf Fortress section of our simulation suite, the performance of the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X is inconsistent, to say the least. In the smaller of our three Dwart Fortress tests, there's around 2-3% difference between the Ryzen 7000 chips, the Core i9-12900K and Core i7-12700K, and AMD's impressive Ryzen 7 5800X3D with its incredibly large 96 MB pool of cache to play with.

In the larger Dwarf Fortress workloads, and the Alder Lake based Core i9-12900K, the Core i7-12700K and the Core i5-12600K show better scope for performance, with the exception being the Ryzen 7 5800X3D which due to its large 3D V-Cache, keeps the pressure on Intel.

Looking at performance in our Factorio benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D with its 3D V-Cache is streets ahead of the competition, with both the Ryzen 9 7950X and Ryzen 5 7600X both lagging behind considerably. Comparing Ryzen 7000 to Intel's Alder Lake, Alder Lake has the overall advantage here, even with the many optimizations and improvements that Zen 4 brings to the table.

Encoding

(5-1a) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 480p Discord

(5-1b) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 720p YouTube

(5-1c) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 4K60 HEVC

(5-2a) 7-Zip 1900 Compression

(5-2b) 7-Zip 1900 Decompression

(5-2c) 7-Zip 1900 Combined Score

(5-4) WinRAR 5.90 Test, 3477 files, 1.96 GB

Focusing on encoding, and the Ryzen 9 7950X is the clear winner, beating the Core i9-12900K in all but one of the Handbrake tests (1080p30). The Ryzen 5 7600X trades blows with last generation Ryzen 7 5800X, which is an improvement within itself, as the Ryzen 5 5600X does lag behind the rest of the pack.

CPU Benchmark Performance: Power, Web, And Science CPU Benchmark Performance: Rendering
POST A COMMENT

205 Comments

View All Comments

  • Tomatotech - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    Nice idea but you’re swimming against the flow of history. The trend is always to more tightly integrate various components into smaller and smaller packages. Apple have moved to onboard RAM in the same package as the CPU which has bought significant bandwidth advantages and seems to have boosted iGPU to the level of low-end dGPUs.

    The main takeaway from your metaphor of the 650w dGPU with a 55w mainboard and 100-200w CPU is that high-end dGPUs are now effectively separate computers in their own right - especially as a decent one can be well over 50% of the cost of the whole PC - and are being constrained by having to fit into the PC in terms of physical space, power supply capacity, and cooling capacity.

    It’s a shrinking market on both the low end and high end for home use of dGPU, given these innovations and constraints and I don’t know where it’s going to go from here.

    Since I got optic fibre, I’ve started renting cloud based high-end dGPU and it has been amazing albeit the software interface has been frustrating at times. With symmetric gigabit service and 1-3ms ping, it’s like having it under my desk. I worked out that for unlimited hours and given the cost of electricity, it would take 10 years for my cloud rental costs to match the cost of buying and running a home high end dGPU.

    Not everyone has optic fibre of course but globally it’s rolling out year by year so the trend is clear again.
    Reply
  • Castillan - Wednesday, September 28, 2022 - link

    "

    clang version 10.0.0
    clang version 7.0.1 (ssh://git@github.com/flang-compiler/flang-driver.git
    24bd54da5c41af04838bbe7b68f830840d47fc03)

    -Ofast -fomit-frame-pointer
    -march=x86-64
    -mtune=core-avx2
    -mfma -mavx -mavx2
    "

    ...and then later the article says:

    "The performance increase can be explained by a number of variables, including the switch from DDR4 to DDR5 memory, a large increase in clock speed, as well as the inclusion of the AVX-512 instruction set, albeit using two 256-bit pumps."

    The problem here being that those arguments to Clang will NOT enable AVX-512. Only AVX2 will be enabled. I verified this on an AVX512 system.

    To enable AVX512, at least at the most basic level, you'll want to use "-mavx512f ". There's also a whole stack of other AVX512 capabilities, which are enabled with "-mavx512dq -mavx512bw -mavx512vbmi -mavx512vbmi2 -mavx512vl" but some may not be supported. It won't hurt to include those on the command line though, until you try to compile something that makes use of those specific features, and then you'll see a failure if the platform doesn't support those extensions.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    Correct. AVX-512 is not in play here. That is an error in analysis on our part. Thanks! Reply
  • pman6 - Thursday, September 29, 2022 - link

    intel supports 8k60 AV1 decode.

    Does ryzen 7000 support 8k60 ??
    Reply
  • GeoffreyA - Monday, October 3, 2022 - link

    The Radeon Technology Group is getting 16K ready. Reply
  • yhselp - Thursday, September 29, 2022 - link

    I'd love to see you investigate memory scaling on the Zen 4 core. Reply
  • Myrandex - Thursday, September 29, 2022 - link

    The table on page four mentions "Quad Channel (128-bit bus)" for memory support. Does that mean we could have a 4 memory slot solution, with one memory module per channel, with four channel support? This way to drastically increase memory bandwidth all while maintaining those fast DDR5 frequencies? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    No. That configuration would be no different than a 2 DIMM setup in terms of bandwidth or capacity. Slotted memory is all configured DIMMs; as in Dual Inline Memory Module. Reply
  • GeoffreyA - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    All in all, excellent work, AMD, on the 7950X. Undoubtedly shocking performance. Even that dubious AVX-512 benchmark where Intel used to win, Zen 4 has taken command of it. However, lower your prices, AMD, and don't be so greedy. Little by little, you are becoming Intel. Don't be evil.

    Thanks, Ryan and Gavin, for the review and all the hard work. Much appreciated. Have a great week.
    Reply
  • Footman36 - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    Yawn. I really don't see what the big fuss is about. I currently run 5600X and was interested to see how the 7600X compared and while it does look like a true uplift in performance over the 5600X, I would have to factor in cost of new motherboard and DDR5 ram! On top of that, the comparison is not exactly apples to apples in the testing. 7600X has a turbo speed of 5.3, 5600X 4.6. 7600X runs with 5200 DDR5 and 5600X 3200 DDR4, 7600X has TDP 105W, 5600X 65W. If you take a look at the final page where the 7950X is tested in ECO mode which effectively supplies 65W instead of 105W you lose 18% performance. If we try to do apples to apples and use eco mode with 7600X, to get apples to apples with 65W of 5600W, then lower boost to 4.6ghz then the performance of the 2 cpu's looks very similar. Perhaps not the way I should be analyzing the results, but just my observation.... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now