SPEC2017 Single-Threaded Results

SPEC2017 is a series of standardized tests used to probe the overall performance between different systems, different architectures, different microarchitectures, and setups. The code has to be compiled, and then the results can be submitted to an online database for comparison. It covers a range of integer and floating point workloads, and can be very optimized for each CPU, so it is important to check how the benchmarks are being compiled and run.

We run the tests in a harness built through Windows Subsystem for Linux, developed by Andrei Frumusanu. WSL has some odd quirks, with one test not running due to a WSL fixed stack size, but for like-for-like testing it is good enough. Because our scores aren’t official submissions, as per SPEC guidelines we have to declare them as internal estimates on our part.

For compilers, we use LLVM both for C/C++ and Fortan tests, and for Fortran we’re using the Flang compiler. The rationale of using LLVM over GCC is better cross-platform comparisons to platforms that have only have LLVM support and future articles where we’ll investigate this aspect more. We’re not considering closed-sourced compilers such as MSVC or ICC.

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

Our compiler flags are straightforward, with basic –Ofast and relevant ISA switches to allow for AVX2 instructions.

To note, the requirements for the SPEC licence state that any benchmark results from SPEC have to be labelled ‘estimated’ until they are verified on the SPEC website as a meaningful representation of the expected performance. This is most often done by the big companies and OEMs to showcase performance to customers, however is quite over the top for what we do as reviewers.

SPECint2017 Rate-1 Estimated Scores

Starting off with single-threaded performance in SPECint2017, we can see that AMD's new Zen 4 core performs when compared directly with its previous Zen 3 and even more so, its Zen 2 microarchitecture. In 500.perlbench_r, the Ryzen 9 7950X has a 27% uplift over the previous Zen 3 based Ryzen 9 5950X, with a massive 94% uplift in single-threaded performance over the Zen 2 based Ryzen 9 3950X. This in itself is impressive, with similar levels of performance increase in other SPECint2017 tests such as a 23% increase over the previous generation in 525.x264_r and 30% in the 548.exchange2_r test.

The performance increase can be explained by a number of variables, including the switch from DDR4 to DDR5 memory, as well as a large increase in clock speed.

SPECfp2017 Rate-1 Estimated Scores

Moving onto our SPECfp2017 1T results, we see a similar increase in performance as in the previous set of 1T-tests. Focusing on the 503.bwaves_r, we are seeing an uplift of 37% over Zen 3. Interestingly, the performance in 549.fotonik3d, we see an increase of around 27% over the Ryzen 9 3950X, although Intel's Alder Lake architecture which is also on DDR5 is outperforming the Ryzen 9 7950X.

Perhaps the biggest increase in Zen 4's improvement in IPC over Zen 3 is through doubling the L2 cache on the 7950X (16MB) versus the 5950X (8MB). Similarly, both the Ryzen 9 7950X and 5950X have a large pool of L3 cache (64MB), but the 7950X boosts up to 5.7 GHz on a single core providing the core temperature is below 50°C, or 5.6 GHz if above 50°C. 

As it stands at the time of writing, AMD's Ryzen 9 7950X is the clear leader in single-core IPC performance, with a pretty comprehensive increase in IPC performance over Zen 3. Although Intel's Alder Lake (12th Gen) provided gains over AMD's Ryzen 5000 series in a multitude of ways including frequency, optimizations, and its complex hybrid architecture. There is no doubt that the latest Zen 4 microarchitecture using TSMC's 5 nm node gives AMD the single-thread performance crown, and in terms of single-threaded applications, it's the most powerful x86 desktop processor right now.

Core-to-Core Latency SPEC2017 Multi-Threaded Results
POST A COMMENT

205 Comments

View All Comments

  • jakky567 - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    I'm confused by USB 2, do you mean USB 2.0 or USB 4v2, or what? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    Yes, USB 2.0.

    USB 4v2 was just announced. We're still some time off from it showing up in any AMD products.
    Reply
  • Myrandex - Thursday, September 29, 2022 - link

    lol did they share any reason why to give a single USB 2.0 port? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, September 30, 2022 - link

    Basic, low complexity I/O. Implementing a USB 2.x port is relatively simple these days. It's a bit of a failsafe, really. Reply
  • LuxZg - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    One question and one observation.

    Q: ECO mode says 170W -> 105W but tested CPU was 170W -> 65W. Is that a typo or was that just to show off? I wish that sample graph showed 7600X at 105W and 65W in addition to 7950X at 170/105/65W.

    Observation: 5800X is 260$ on Amazon. So with cheaper DDR4, cheaper MBOs, and cheaper CPU, it will be big competition inside AMD's own house. At least for those that don't "need" PCIe 5.0 or future proofing.
    Reply
  • andrewaggb - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    I was confused by that as well.
    The way I read the paragraph suggested 170w eco mode is 105w but then it's stated the cpu was tested at 65w. Was it meant to say 105w or can a 170w be dialed down to 65w and the test is correctly labelled?
    Reply
  • Otritus - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    By default while under 95*C, 203*F, 368.15K, the 7950X will have a TDP of 170 watts and use up to 230 watts of power. You can think of it like TDP and Turbo Power on Intel. Eco mode will reduce TDP to 105 watts (and use up to 142 watts??). You can manually set the power limits, and Anandtech set them to 65 watts to demonstrate efficiency. Meaning the 7950X was not in eco mode, but a manual mode more efficient than eco mode. Reply
  • uefi - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    Just by supporting Microsoft's cloud connected hardware DRM makes the 7000 series vastly inferior to all current Intel CPUs. Reply
  • Makaveli - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    So you are saying intel is not going to implement this in any of their Future processors?

    If the Raptorlake review shows it supports that also i'm going to back to this message.
    Reply
  • socket420 - Monday, September 26, 2022 - link

    I don't understand where these "intel rulez because they don't use pluton!!" people are coming from - one, the Intel Management Engine... exists, and two, Microsoft explicitly stated that Pluton was developed with the support of AMD, Intel and Qualcomm back in 2020. Intel is clearly on-board with it and I expect to see Pluton included in Raptor Lake or Meteor Lake, they're just late to the party because that's what Intel does best, I guess? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now