AMD vs. Intel at 16 cores: We test Ryzen Threadripper 1950X against Core i9-7960X - garrisonusdeouster

Who makes the best 16-core CPU? Now that AMD has its 16-core group Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Intel has its 16-core Core i9-7960X, we had a chance to determine proscribed when boutique custom PC builder Falcon N built a pair of nearly-identical rigs that could truly go head to head.

Our 16-core Falcon Northwest Talon specs

American Samoa Falcon Northwest is famous for, both Talon systems are over-the-top in specs and chassis. Each came equipped with:

128GB of DDR4 Pound
Two Nvidia Titan Xp art cards in SLI
A pair of Samsung 1TB 960 In favor of SSDs
A 6TB Western Digital Winchester drive

Both feature the same 1,000-watt EVGA Super Nova G3 PSU and the same custom closed-loop cooler system. The number and typecast of organisation fans are the same as well.

talon redclouds right hi — This Falcon North Talon features a 16-gist Threadripper 1950X, 128GB of Read/write memor, and pair of Titan Xp nontextual matter cards. The blusher job is known as Red Clouds.

Although both have the same storage subsystem, at that place is a slight variance. The pair of Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSDs in the Intel system are configured as PCIe devices in RAID 0, while the AMD loge keeps some Samsung 960 Pro drives arsenic fork drives.

We settled for this divergence so as not to hobble the Intel boxful. After all, at the fourth dimension we requested the machines in early September, RAID 0 using NVMe drives was lendable single connected the Intel chopine (non VROC, but using the X299 chipset) not connected AMD's X399. Since then, AMD has introduced support for NVMe RAID.

Looking at the read and publish performance of both machines, the difference doesn't seem to matter much. The Intel system has slightly higher read speeds, while the AMD system has somewhat high write speeds.

We mated cautiously in most other areas. Both CPUs are kept bone stock. At the time of our story, Falcon had qualified 128GB of RAM leading 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 decided to keep both machines at DDR4/2400 to match in price also as capability.

Other than the CPU and motherboard, the only unusual big difference is the color. The AMD machine is hand-painted in luscious Red Clouds, while the Intel machine is hand-painted in the striking Cobalt Clouds.

talon cobaltclouds left hi — This Falcon Northwest Talon features a 16-core Core i9-7960X, 128GB of Random memory, and a pair of Titan Xp graphics card. The paint job is known as Cobalt Clouds.

Performance: CPU-central tests

Cinebench R15 Public presentation

First in the lead is Maxon's Cinebench R15 test. It's a free benchmark based on the rendering engine Maxon uses in its master Cinema4D app. IT's extremely multi-threaded and almost entirely a Mainframe-focused test (though there is a graphics exam, too).

The default mode is to test all of the cores at formerly. The Core i9 squeaks by the Threadripper box by a few percentage points.

fnw showdown cinebench nt — Our first-class honours degree test is CineBench R15, where the 16-core Core i9-7960X has a very moderate vantage.

Cinebench R15 also allows you to tweak the number of threads to test, thus we ran it on only a one-woman core. This is where Intel has had an reward over Zen-based chips, and it shows with the Core group i9's 15-percent delude one-member-threaded tasks. We'll dive into just where Intel gets this advantage subsequent, but anyone who thinks this International Relations and Security Network't a big win for the 16-core Core i9 is in denial.

fnw showdown cinebench 1t — Cinebench R15 happening light mountain gives the Intel chip the nod.

POV Ray Performance

The Persistence of Vision Raytracer is an app that literally goes backmost to the days of the Commodore Amiga. Obviously converted to hightail it happening modern hardware, the free light beam tracer bullet loves CPU cores and threads. Eastern Samoa we saw with Cinebench, the Heart i9 has a slight sharpness in performance.

POV-Ray as wel supports running in single-threaded style. As with Cinebench, we see a very clear vantage go to the Core i9, mostly payable to the clock speed advantage the Intel chip holds. (We'll pay off into just how much of a clock pelt along advantage that is later on.) There's none denying that on softly threaded loads, Core i9 has the advantage.

Blender Operation

Liquidiser is an open-germ 3D modeler that sees a spate of use aside independent movie makers for effects sequences. Even NASA uses Blender these days to produce 3D models.

Blender was also the benchmark of choice AMD victimised when information technology first unveiled its Zen Central processor last year. So World Health Organization leads the way here? In the graph on a lower floor (showing Liquidizer using the BMW benchmark), glower scores are better in rendering, and the Core i9 has a double-figure lead finished the Threadripper set out. Ouch.

fnw showdown blender bmw — Using the popular BMW benchark load in Blender, The Core i9 has a moderate advantage over Threadripper.

Corona Renderer 1.3 Operation

Corona Renderer was first introduced with AMD's Threadripper, and it was used to soundly trounce Intel's 10-core group Core i9-7900X chip because 16 > 10. When information technology's 16-on-16, though, things X a little sidelong. Where Cinebench and POV-Ray put the cardinal CPUs moderately close, Corona Renderer 1.3 puts the Threadripper about 19 percent slower than the Core i9. Ouch again.

Benchmarks can be easily become political footballs, with unrivaled side's fans claiming a test is cooked to privilege the other. LET's remind everyone that it was AMD who recommended the Corona Renderer prove.

fnw showdown corona renderer 1.3 — AMD showcased the Corposant Benchmark for the Threadripper found, but in a matched 16-core vs. 16-effect battle, the Ryzen loses.

7-Travel rapidly Performance

Moving on to a compression test, we use the popular and free 7-Zip to measure how fast each motorcar is at manipulation file concretion. Using the internal benchmark, the Heart and soul i9 is about 9 pct faster.

fnw showdown 7 zip 9.20 nt — 7-Zip on multi-threaded tests has both CPUs middling uncommunicative in operation.

7-Nix likewise features a single-threaded test, the results of which are zero surprise: The Core i9 comes out about 21 percent quicker than the Threadripper part. Again, this is likely due to the clock speed advantage of the Intel chip over its AMD counterpart.

fnw showdown 7 zip 9.20 1t — In single-threaded tasks, the advantage Core i9 has over Threadripper is some clearer.

Handbrake Operation

For encoding, we ran our standard exam, which tasks the free Handbrake encoder with converting a 30GB 1080p MKV single file using the Mechanical man Tablet preset. Like most encoders, Handbrake favors having more cores, and we see the ii chips in the same locality at least. The Core i9 still comes out forwards away 8 percent, but at least it ISN't the blowout we saw in St. Elmo's fire operating room Blender.

fnw showdown handbrake — For our encoding test, we tasked each machine with converting a 30GB 1080p MKV file using Handbrake.

Yes, yes, but how come they gritty? Go along reading to discovery out.

Gaming Carrying into action

We get into't typically weigh a 16-core Core i9 operating theatre 16-core Threadripper chip as CPUs for gamers, but in reality, a lot of people with high-end hardware play games. Granted that both rigs are configured with a pair of Titan Xp card game, we simply have to try out these machines in play.

Note that we ran the Threadripper using the latest version of Ryzen Master in Game Mode and in Creator Mode (which you can read some Hera in our fresh review of Threadripper.) The best score for each test was reported.

3DMark Fourth dimension Spy 1.0 Performance

First ahead is Futuremark's 3DMark Time Spy test. Information technology's the ship's company's latest DirectX12 benchmark. Because we care only roughly Mainframe carrying out, we're reporting only the CPU subscore. Cleary, the test likes Core i9 more.

fnw showdown 3dmark time spy 1 cpu — 3DMark Time Spy besides gives the nod to Intel.

3DMark Time Descry Extreme 1.1 Performance

Futuremark has been hardened at work creating an Extreme version of its new DirectX12 benchmark. Luckily, we had it one of these days to escape on our pair of Falcon PCs.

fnw showdown time spy extreme 1.1 overall — Here's how nearly congruent PCs perform in the brand new 3DMark Time Spy Extremum 1.1.

The overall score itself was basically a tie, with the Core i9 box hitting 8,864 and the Threadripper box marking 8,630. If you fag into the sub-make focalisation on the CPU, though, the Core i9 again has a carrying into action edge aside about 20 percent. Wherefore? That's hard to aver. It's unlikely this is all a time pep pill advantage.

fnw showdown time spy extreme 1.1 cpu — The newly released 3DMark Time Spy Extreme 1.1 favors Intel in its C.P.U. test.

Heart-earth: Shadower of Mordor Execution

The close footprint is to see how this translates into real games at realistic resolutions. We ran several bump off-the-shelf games on their highest visual quality settings at 4K resoluteness. In that respect's no 1920×1080 at Medium nonsense here: Information technology's wholly about playing with the pair of Titan Xp cards maxed proscribed.

As we noted antecedently, we ran the tests in both Game Mode and Creator Mode on the Threadripper system, and we utilised the highest score obtained in either modal value. For Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, though, information technology didn't matter. Some of Threadripper's modes produced the same performance. And yes, mostly, even with a pair of Titan Xp cards in SLI, both Falcon machines are tied.

shadows of mordor 4k ultra threadripper vs core i9 — Both machines are jolly a lot tied in *Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor* guide at 4K answer connected the Ultra quality setting.

Stand up of the Tomb Raider Performance

Our next test was Rise of the Tomb Raider. AMD successful often hay of Originate of the Tomb Raider's patch, which helped close Ryzen's performance gap compared to Intel chips. The problem, AMD said, was old code that just didn't roll in the hay how to handle with Threadripper. For our tests, we ran at 4K resolution connected the Same High preset and in DirectX 12 musical mode. Threadripper is a frame close to faster, but for all but disunite—it's a tie.

rise of the tomb raider 4k very high threadripper vs core i9 — In Rise of the Tomb Raider, a much-ballyhooed speckle puts Ryzen Threadripper right in step with Core i9.

Deus Ex: World Divided Functioning

Deus Old-fashioned: Man Bifid is another screen that AMD really loved when Ryzen 7 first shipped because, well, IT runs pretty well connected AMD CPUs. For our test, we ran Mankind Divided along the Ultra scope and 4K resolution.

The solvent from a play perspective is disappointing, as both machines could barely reach 60 fps straight with two Heavyweight Xp GPUs and high-cease CPUs. More significantly, the Core i9 has a flimsy edge up frame order. The carrying into action of Threadripper was the equivalent betwixt Game Mode and Creator Style.

deus ex mankind divided 4k ultra threadripper vs core i9 — Core i9 has a slight edge in Deus Exwife Mankind Divided.

Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege Performance

So far the balance in play has been a railroad tie or in favor of Intel, but that flips once we get to Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege, which we ran at 4K resolution and connected the Extremist quality setting. The Threadripper Talon system comes out on tipto by a really decent amount. Its score was achieved with it set to Game Mode, but when set to Creator Way, it wasn't that far hit.

rainbow six siege 4k ultra threadripper vs core i9 — In one of the rarer wins for Threadripper, it comes out a solid 10 Federal Protective Service faster than the Core i9 machine.

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation performance

Our terminal gaming tryout is Stardock's Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation. We ran the test at 4K victimisation the Crazy preset and the CPU Focused setting to test the CPU, kinda than in the GPU Centred mode.

ashes of the singularity escalation 4k crazy cpu focused — Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation appears to favor Intel.

Power consumption

We usually diffident away from superpowe consumption comparisons because they behind be blown out of proportion. In a desktop Microcomputer with multiple drives and a art card, the CPU International Relations and Security Network't the power Sus scrofa, it's the graphic menu. The second reason is the difficulty measuring power economic consumption between different systems. But hey, here we are with nearly duplicate systems, so we plugged the Northwest Talon PCs into Isaac Watts Up Pro meters and sounded the total power white plague low different CPU-but loads.

Using Cinebench R15 to push the systems from 1 thread to 32 togs, information technology was crystallize which CPU was the winner. What's also interesting is to see how Threadripper's power consumption levels off once it hits about a 16-wind load. Core i9 just continues to incline up power consumption as you addition the shipment. And mind you—this is stock clocked. Vendors have told us they've seen Core i9 consume more than 500 watts under heavy overclocking.

fnw showdown power scaling — You fire see the power consumption of Threadripper level, while Core i9 just keeps mounting for the stars.

Frequency Scaling

One head many populate have asked is just where Core i9 gets altogether of its performance. Mostly, Pith i9 is a modified Skylake core, which way that in Instructions Per Cycle, it's not that far ahead of the cores in the Threadripper chip. The main difference is probable its clock advantage. We again took Cinebench R15 and wide-ranging the workload from 1 thread to 32 togs, recording the clock speeds using the respective Intel or AMD utilities (XTU and Ryzen Subdue).

The chart below shows the Core i9 with a minimum of 200MHz clock speed advantage happening loads up to 13 duds or so. Beyond that, Threadripper actually has the advantage by about 100MHz.

fnw showdown clock scaling — You can see where much of the improvement for Marrow i9 comes from on the David Low-end: clock fastness.

Thread scaling performance

To see how that time speed advantage plays kayoed, we again use Cinebench R15 to vary the workload from 1T to 32T and track record the unalterable score. Core i9 leads the way the integral clock.

fnw showdown cinebench scaling — Core i9 has the performance advantage in brightness level loads and besides heavy loads.

One thing the above chart doesn't get across is the actual advantage the Core i9 has along gently threaded tasks, then we calculated the percent difference between the cardinal. The Green River bars on a lower floor express the Core i9 has pretty much a double-digit performance advantage on light threaded tasks up to about 16 togs.

fnw showdown cinebench scaling percent change — Our Cinebench graph doesn't quite read the performance reward the Core i9 has at candescent loads, but this clearly shows a identical healthy double-digit performance at light-duty loads for Kernel i9, and a five-percent advantage on multi-threaded tasks.

The bang for shoot down Newmarket here

AMD fans have been biting their tongues this whole time, and here's why: Our 16-core vs. 16-core repugn ignores the key difference between Core i9-7960X and Threadripper 1950X. AMD charges $1,000 for the Threadripper 1950X, while Intel charges $1,700 for the Core i9-7960X. In builder's terms, that difference of opinion is equivalent to a motherboard and a decent SSD.

If we had distinct to do this repugn based on CPU pricing, it truly would personify the 16-core Threadripper 1950X vs. the 10-CORE Core i9-7960X. That flips the entire conversation, as you can see in the 16-substance vs. 10-core engagement we did when we in the beginning reviewed Threadripper 1950X.

The chart below shows the performance reward the 10-core Core i9-7900X has at the low end, only once you cross over to about 10 threads, Threadripper's 16 cores takes complete and you're looking capable a 31-percent performance deficit for that Core i9 crisp.

threadripper money shot — The private to Threadripper is its cost. You can run into where the 16-nitty-gritty Threadripper 1950X rips the 10-core Core i9-7900X to pieces despite being the same price.

Unmatched closing thing to consider is that the Leontyne Price of just the CPU isn't everything. When it's watered pour down by the tally cost of the organization, IT may so beryllium worth it for several. For instance, the Falcon Northwestern United States Talon systems that we used were some daydream configurations with $2,400 in GPUs, maybe $1,800 in Aries the Ram and $1,200 in SSDs. That doesn't count the motherboard, hard ram down, cooling, case, major power provision operating theater custom hand-paint jobs. When you're edifice a box up this grasp, the Price deviation in the CPU isn't that much. Of of course, not everyone buys loaded machines like the Falcons. If your machine budget is nigher to $3,500, so the $700 you save on a Threadripper represents a much large part of the budget.

fnw showdown total system cost — The $700 probably seems exuberant—unless you're looking at an uber-expensive box so much as either of the Falcon Northwest Talon PCs.

Conclusion

Looked at in a center-vs.-heart and soul battle without considering price, Intel's Heart i9-7960X leads the way. IT gives you great performance at light applications and generally can't be touched by the Threadripper 1950X in industrial applications, either. In a lot of the tests we ran, we were actually surprised Nub i9 ran forth from Threadripper so easily.

That said, it's pretty hard to ignore price when you're outlay your own money on a build. Our opinion hasn't changed for Threadripper: It is absolutely the best $1,000 CPU you tail end get, a spectacular deal. Just price aside, in a 16-vs.-16 battle, Core i9 is the succeeder.

Source: https://www.pcworld.com/article/407420/amd-vs-intel-we-test-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-against-core-i9-7960x.html

Posted by: garrisonusdeouster.blogspot.com