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-source 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 labeled ‘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

Opening things up with SPECint2017 single-threaded performance, it's clear that Intel has improved ST performance for Raptor Lake on generation-upon-generation basis. Because the Raptor Cove P-cores used here don't deliver significant IPC gains, these performance gains are primarily being driven by the chip's higher frequency. In particular, Intel has made notable progress in improving their v/f curve, which allows Intel to squeeze out more raw frequency.

And this is something Intel's own data backs up, with one of Intel's performance breakdown slides showing that the bulk of the gains are due to frequency, while improved memory speeds and the larger caches only making small contributions.

The ST performance itself in SPECint2017 is marginally better going from Alder Lake to Raptor Lake, but these differences can certainly be explained by the improvements as highlighted above. What's interesting is the performance gap between the Core i9-13900K and the Ryzen 9 7950X isn't as far apart as it was with Alder Lake vs. Ryzen 9 5950X. In 500.perlbench_r, the Raptor Lake chip actually outperforms the Zen 4 variant by just under 4%, while Ryzen 9 7950X is a smidgen over 10% better in the 505.mcf_r test. 

SPECfp2017 Rate-1 Estimated Scores

Looking at the second set of SPEC2017 results (fp), the Ryzen 9 7950X is ahead of the Core i9-13900K by 16% in the 503.bwaves_r test, while the Raptor Lake chip is just under 10% better off in the 508.namd_r test. The key points to digest here is that Intel has done well to bridge the gap in single-threaded performance to Ryzen 7000 in most of the tests, and overall, it's a consistent trade-off between which test favors which mixture of architecture, frequency, and most importantly of all, IPC performance.

While we highlighted in our AMD Ryzen 9 7950X processor review, which at the time of publishing was the clear leader in single-core performance, it seems as though Intel's Raptor Lake is biting at the heels of the new Zen 4-core. In some instances, it's actually ahead, but stiff competition from elsewhere is always good as competition creates innovation.

With Raptor Lake being more of a transitional and enhanced core design that Intel's worked with before (Alder Lake), it remains to be seen what the future of 2023 holds for Intel's advancement in IPC and single-threaded performance. Right now, however SPEC paints a picture where it's pretty much neck and neck between Raptor Cove and Zen 4.

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

169 Comments

View All Comments

  • nandnandnand - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    The 7950X outperforms the 13900K from 65W to 185W by substantial amounts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P40gp_DJk5E (19:00, Cinebench R23 multi)

    It also seems to use less power at lower temps in gaming (23:00, Cyberpunk 2077)

    That's probably not the end of the story, but Zen 4 is clearly doing better out of the box. Good news for Dragon Range buyers in 2023.
    Reply
  • Harry_Wild - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    Very happy that Raptor Lake is super competitive to AMD 7000 series! AMD has to lower it’s high end pricing now for both it’s chipset and retail pricing. Let the price wars begin after Thanksgivings. I expect the 7050X to go from $699 to $499. X670E boards will be the same price as the Intel equivalent models! 😁👍 Reply
  • Drazick - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    Could you build / compiler the SPEC tests with AVX512 flags for the Ryzen 7xxx? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    It's on the to-do list. Though we're not expecting a significant change in performance. Reply
  • Kangal - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    Any plans to test these in thermally or energy-constrained limits? Like with Air Cooling, or certain Watt limits?

    Or perhaps, how will Zen4 on laptops compare to Intel's RPL-equivalent on laptops...?

    From here it looks similar to Zen3 vs Intel 12th, or Zen2 vs Intel 11th. That AMD is competitive in multithread and better efficiency, and Intel only remains competitive by expending alot of power, and it's mostly for the single-core.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    Yes. Performance testing at lower power levels is also on the to-do list. We had a chance to play with eco mode a bit for the Ryzen review, but didn't get to do something similar for Raptor Lake. Reply
  • Kangal - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    Oh nice, will be waiting for that next article to drop. Cheers!
    Reply
  • m53 - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    @Ryan: How about testing idle power and realistic day-to-day use cases? I can only find this kind of review for 12th gen vs Zen3 and not 13th gen vs zen4. Would be really nice to have the numbers for 13th zen vs zen4.

    Here is a link to the review for 12th gen vs zen3: https://youtu.be/4F2z3F64o94
    Reply
  • Drazick - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    @Ryan, I am not sure about it.
    I think enabling AVX512 on Ryzen will have a great effect on the FP tests of SPEC.
    Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, October 28, 2022 - link

    There wasn’t a delay when one of the rendering apps got AVX-512 support several years ago. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now