1950x cinebench
![1950x cinebench 1950x cinebench](http://oc.jagatreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/TR_04.jpg)
#1950x cinebench 1080p
Handbrake Performanceįor encoding, we ran our standard test, which tasks the free Handbrake encoder with converting a 30GB 1080p MKV file using the Android Tablet preset. In single-threaded tasks, the advantage Core i9 has over Threadripper is much clearer. Again, this is likely due to the clock speed advantage of the Intel chip over its AMD counterpart. IDGħ-Zip on multi-threaded tests has both CPUs fairly close in performance.ħ-Zip also features a single-threaded test, the results of which are no surprise: The Core i9 comes out about 21 percent faster than the Threadripper part. Using the internal benchmark, the Core i9 is about 9 percent faster. Moving on to a compression test, we use the popular and free 7-Zip to measure how fast each machine is at handling file compression. IDGĪMD showcased the Corona Benchmark for the Threadripper launch, but in a matched 16-core vs. Let’s remind everyone that it was AMD who recommended the Corona Renderer test. Ouch again.īenchmarks can be easily become political footballs, with one side’s fans claiming a test is cooked to favor the other. Where Cinebench and POV-Ray put the two CPUs fairly close, Corona Renderer 1.3 puts the Threadripper about 19 percent slower than the Core i9.
![1950x cinebench 1950x cinebench](https://www.modding.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Gm6yu9DTqUgi8geb.jpg)
When it’s 16-on-16, though, things go a little sideways. Corona Renderer 1.3 PerformanceĬorona Renderer was first introduced with AMD’s Threadripper, and it was used to soundly trounce Intel’s 10-core Core i9-7900X chip because 16 > 10. Using the popular BMW benchark load in Blender, The Core i9 has a small advantage over Threadripper.
![1950x cinebench 1950x cinebench](https://i.pinimg.com/474x/58/1a/81/581a81325e15955c7b4293472b50561d.jpg)
So who leads the way here? In the chart below (showing Blender using the BMW benchmark), lower scores are better in rendering, and the Core i9 has a double-digit lead over the Threadripper part. Even NASA uses Blender these days to produce 3D models.īlender was also the benchmark of choice AMD used when it first unveiled its Zen CPU last year.
#1950x cinebench movie
IDGīlender is an open-source 3D modeler that sees a lot of use by independent movie makers for effects sequences. (We’ll get into just how much of a clock speed advantage that is later on.) There’s no denying that on lightly threaded loads, Core i9 has the advantage. As with Cinebench, we see a very clear advantage go to the Core i9, mostly due to the clock speed advantage the Intel chip holds. POV-Ray also supports running in single-threaded mode. The AMD machine is hand-painted in luscious Red Clouds, while the Intel machine is hand-painted in the striking Cobalt Clouds. Other than the CPU and motherboard, the only other big difference is the color. We decided to keep both machines at DDR4/2400 to match in price as well as capability. At the time of our story, Falcon had qualified 128GB of RAM up to DDR4/3000 speeds for the Intel system, while the highest-clocked RAM on the Threadripper system when using 8 DIMMS was DDR4/2400. We matched carefully in most other areas. The Intel system has somewhat higher read speeds, while the AMD system has somewhat higher write speeds. Looking at the read and write performance of both machines, the difference doesn’t seem to matter much. Since then, AMD has introduced support for NVMe RAID. After all, at the time we requested the machines in early September, RAID 0 using NVMe drives was available only on the Intel platform (not VROC, but using the X299 chipset) not on AMD’s X399. In terms of performance, AMD showcased how the new Threadripper chips would compare against Intel’s most powerful currently available chip, the 10-core i9-7900X priced at $999.We settled for this variance so as not to hobble the Intel box. The Ryzen Threadripper will be based on the same underlying architecture powering the Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 5 chips. Ryzen Threadripper vs Core i9: Cinebench R15 Performance The 1950X will cost you $700 less than the 16-core, 32-thread Core i9-7960X, and the 1920X will be $400 cheaper than the 12-core i9-7920X. Both chips are significantly cheaper than Intel’s rival Core i9 offerings. The Threadripper 1950X will sell for $999, while the Threadripper 1920X retails for $799. On the lower end, the Threadripper 1920X is a 12-core, 24-thread CPU with a base clock speed of 3.5GHz and the same 4GHz boost clock. The flagship 16-core, 32-thread chip, dubbed the Threadripper 1950X, runs at a base clock of 3.4GHz and can boost up to 4GHz. AMD reveals Threadripper Price and Clock Speeds The high-end desktop processors include the 12- and 16-core Ryzen Threadripper, which are aimed at enthusiasts and data scientists. AMD today revealed Threadripper price and other details as the product nears release.