CPU Benchmark Performance: Rendering And Encoding

Rendering tests, compared to others, are often a little more simple to digest and automate. All the tests put out some sort of score or time, usually in an obtainable way that makes it fairly easy to extract. These tests are some of the most strenuous in our list, due to the highly threaded nature of rendering and ray-tracing, and can draw a lot of power.

If a system is not properly configured to deal with the thermal requirements of the processor, the rendering benchmarks are where it would show most easily as the frequency drops over a sustained period of time. Most benchmarks in this case are re-run several times, and the key to this is having an appropriate idle/wait time between benchmarks to allow for temperatures to normalize from the last test.

One of the interesting elements of 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.

We are using DDR5 memory on the Core i9-13900K, the Core i5-13600K, the Ryzen 9 7950X, and Ryzen 5 7600X, as well as Intel's 12th Gen (Alder Lake) processors at the following settings:

  • DDR5-5600B CL46 - Intel 13th Gen
  • 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.

Rendering

(4-1) Blender 3.3 BMW27: Compute

(4-1b) Blender 3.3 Classroom: Compute

(4-1c) Blender 3.3 Fishy Cat: Compute

(4-1d) Blender 3.3 Pabellon Barcelona: Compute

(4-1e) Blender 3.3 Barbershop: Compute

(4-3) POV-Ray 3.7.1

(4-4) V-Ray Renderer

(4-5) C-Ray 1.1: 4K, 16 Rays Per Pixel

(4-6) CineBench R23 Single Thread

(4-6b) CineBench R23 Multi-Thread

Identifying what core comes where in our rendering tests, both the Core i9-13900K and Ryzen 9 7950X sit comfortably at the top of the tree. Depending on the test, it’s a consistent battle for rendering supremacy. Where things aren’t as close are in our POV-Ray and V-Ray tests, where the Core i9-13900K has a distinct advantage; likely down to having eight more logical cores than the 7950X.

Encoding

(5-2) 7-Zip 1900 Compression

(5-2b) 7-Zip 1900 Decompression

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

(5-3) WinRAR 5.90 Test, 3477 files, 1.96 GB

(5-4) x264, Bosphorus 1080p

(5-4b) x264, Bosphorus 4K

In our encoding tests, interestingly the Core i9-13900K looks to have the advantage in compressing files with 7-Zip. It’s a little different for AMD as the Ryzen 9 7950X decompresses the data better, with the overall combined advantage going to AMD in this particular test. In our updated x264 benchmark, Intel takes the lead in 4K encoding, while AMD has the lead in 1080p encoding; both are equally viable options, however.

CPU Benchmark Performance: Simulation CPU Benchmark Performance: Legacy Tests
POST A COMMENT

169 Comments

View All Comments

  • m53 - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    PCs are idle (or used for light browsing, reading bews, watching youtube or a movie, etc.) most of the time. Intel idles at around 12W due to E cores while AMD idles at around 45W which will make the energy consumption 4x. Reply
  • t.s - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    idle around 45w? sources? My 5600G idle at 11W. others, around 7 s/d 17W. Reply
  • titaniumrock - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    here is the source link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNmpVvTUkJE&li... Reply
  • t.s - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    And where it states the AMD vs Intel watt vs watt? Reply
  • Wrs - Friday, October 21, 2022 - link

    A 5600g is a monolithic chip, just like the Intels. A 7600x or 7950x is a multi-chip module, though, with 2 or 3 modules, and the IOD idle is very substantial now with all the PCIe5 lanes. Bottom line Zen 4 is more efficient when doing major work, courtesy of being one process generation ahead, but Raptor Lake and Alder Lake idle lower. If you want low idle with Zen4, wait for the SoC variants like your 5600g. Reply
  • tygrus - Saturday, October 22, 2022 - link

    They don't run constantly with at maximum power consumption in all workloads. They use less while gaming or more integer & less FP/AVX. Highest usage probably when they have a performance lead over the other. AMD can run at lower power limits & loose a few % in many cases. Reply
  • neblogai - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    I was hoping for Ryzen 7000X iGPU benchmarks too. There are no proper comparisons of them vs Intel's 32EU iGPUs on the internet. Reply
  • nandnandnand - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    ETA Prime 7700X iGPU tests (no comparisons):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4cwNn4kI6M (gaming)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnSVPM78ZaQ (emulation)

    7600X vs. 12900 vs. 5700G
    https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/ryzen-7600...

    All Zen 4 vs. 12900K vs. others
    https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-770...

    It's similar to the UHD 770 in Alder Lake, sometimes a little better or worse. About half the performance of a 5700G which is impressive for 2 CUs.

    UHD 770 in Raptor Lake gets +100 MHz across the board, so that could make a slight difference.
    Reply
  • neblogai - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    Thanks. I liked the ones on Techpowerup, as they include tests at 720p low, and tested more than a few titles. Part of my interest is the need to compare to Tomshardware 7950 iGPU results, which looked suspiciously low for the specs, and probably faulty: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-7000-integ... Reply
  • CiccioB - Thursday, October 20, 2022 - link

    About power consumption.
    I think it is completely useless to measure it when running a useless benchmark that you then don't even use to compare the relative performances to other CPUs.
    It would be much worth having a measurement for some more useful (common?) benches, just to understand when a real work is applied how much the CPU is consuming and, related to the performances, understand how efficient it is.

    Just think what the results would be if the CPU would be artificially limited (by BIOS/driver) in Prime95 bench: you would measure a much lower consumption that extrapolated for other tests, and you could just think the CPU is consuming a fraction of what is does. It's the same for the torture benches of GPUs. The max consumption in that test is useless to understand how much they really consume while gaming, and in fact, most of them are artificially limited or just hit the max TDP (which is again not a measure of power consumption).

    If you don't want to provide the power consumption for most benches, at least use a bench that gives a comparable performance, so that (at least for that test) one can make a comparison of the efficiency.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now