CPU Performance: 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

Corona 1.3 Benchmark

The 10980XE sits on par with the 9980XE, but no real difference in performance.

Blender 2.79b: 3D Creation Suite

A high profile rendering tool, Blender is open-source allowing for massive amounts of configurability, and is used by a number of high-profile animation studios worldwide. The organization recently released a Blender benchmark package, a couple of weeks after we had narrowed our Blender test for our new suite, however their test can take over an hour. For our results, we run one of the sub-tests in that suite through the command line - a standard ‘bmw27’ scene in CPU only mode, and measure the time to complete the render.

Blender can be downloaded at https://www.blender.org/download/

Blender 2.79b bmw27_cpu Benchmark

Again, pretty much on par with the 9980XE.

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.

In our test, we run the simple ‘Ball’ scene. 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’.

LuxMark v3.1 C++

We see a small uplift here compared to the 9980XE, but the 10980XE still sits behind the 3950X.

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/

POV-Ray 3.7.1 Benchmark

Another parity between the 10980XE and the 9980XE.

Test Bed and Setup CPU Performance: System Tests
Comments Locked

79 Comments

View All Comments

  • Korguz - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    ever think that maybe they cant ??
  • sarafino - Friday, January 10, 2020 - link

    My guess is that the vast majority of people willing to pay for a Threadripper motherboard, especially a TR4 board, went for the higher core count TR CPU's. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a case of AMD deciding not to waste money on making such low volume SKU.
  • umano - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    I don't think that 10nm intel in 2021 will match or beat amd ryzen 5000. If they will match ryzen 4000 I'd say it's a miracle
  • ballsystemlord - Wednesday, November 27, 2019 - link

    What happened to the 10980XE in the y-Cruncher MT test?
  • hoohoo - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link

    @Ian - your price chart are misleading: you are using retail price for AMD and wholesale (ie per 1000 units) price for Intel.

    The 10980XE will retail with a markup, it will cost 25 or 30 percent higher than the $979 you are using here.
  • ballsystemlord - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link

    He can't be certain what the markup will be, so he's using the tray prices. Not that I recommend that, but it's about as fair as he can be for the time being.
  • NetMage - Thursday, November 28, 2019 - link

    "and so we expect our results here to be consummate with most users’ performance" - I certainly hope not. Perhaps you meant "commensurate"?
  • Gonemad - Friday, November 29, 2019 - link

    Tiny typo... Sub $1k sheet.:

    DRAM Capacity 256GB vs. 128MB.

    Everybody know memories are in the 128GB order of magnitude... but... yeah... GB or MB?

    'Cause we are never sure these days.
    - Nitpicking.
  • sharath.naik - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    Message for intel, the only people who are willing to upgrade are those who already invested in the x299 lga2066 socket motherboards. So when you release a 10nm make sure you release at least one on LGA2066 socket. I am done with Intel if they go after the money and do one more socket change to annoy those who stuck with intel despite their stale processes. For it will make more sense to just move to AMD if you need to buy a new motherboard anyway, Atleast they will support the socket for a few generations of CPUs

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now