Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by HardOCP News, Dec 13, 2016.
On my server at the house 2X 2660 Xeons at stock. My sig rig took 1:15 to complete it.
no need for slides all he has to do is a 30 sec sermon and its all over.
LOL 2% utilization nice!
This blender renderer seems to be part benchmark, part random number generator.
A lot of these results both AMD's and the ones here in this thread just don't make sense when compared to each other.
i got slightly faster with 32 bit, 1:04-05 on 64 bit and 1:02.23 just now on 32 bit. (6700k @ 4.7)
I've downloaded Blender but where do you get the Ryzen demo to run?
Nah, it was an old alpha version of Blender I had installed. Just updated to the new stable, and running at ~1:15 without issue, HT enabled (I never disable it)
That was after it was finished. It was 100% during the render.
Now that is the strangest thing I've seen today. 64-bit is supposed to significantly improve performance in CG rendering tasks. Blender is really weird, I personally use 3dsMax myself so I don't have a lot of experience with this. If they really have better optimization for 32-bit then that's kind of indefensible considering the vast majority of render machines are 64-bit these days.
I suppose it could make sense this is not a memory intensive render and the slower memory performance of 64-bit (better for large integers, and vice versa) is showing itself here. I would still think they should optimize this better.
Well, looks like I will have to buy 2 boards, 2 cpus and 32GB of ram each for my home and work computer right upon release. Do not want to have to deal with the fair weather fans or ebay resellers. GO AMD!
I wonder if this was a custom compiled versions with intel MKL or some other SSE optimizations. Kind of like how AMD compared 3DNow optimized benchmarks to intel back in K6-2/3 days.
1:13.25 on a stock-clock i7 6700k, 32GB DDR4 2400, Z170, 1TB NVMe PCIe x4 SSD. Just another data point.
My 4790K @ 4.5 did it in 1:16.14.
I really hope this release is a success for AMD. I won't be building another computer for awhile, but I'd like an affordable option with eight cores when I finally do. Built way too many quads in the last few years.
Thankyou kindly. Running it now...
Demo and Blender download are here.
Sig rig, 32.11 seconds. Obviously this thing likes morar cores.
Hahaha 4minutes 6.82 seconds on my 965BE 16GB AMD 6990
It's alright took my rig 4:06:82.
My stock clocked / cooled fx8320 did 3 minutes 41 seconds. I did have active mumble and mining in the background. average 15% cpu utilization before i started the test. Despite the minor things running in the background i did expect my 8320 to beat my work i5-2500.. guess not.
Even the most absolute green and blue super fan is hoping this doesn't suck. Our machines are going nowhere fast.
The market needs a shot of enthusiasm.
The ugly parts of my brain just assume AMD will continue to screw the pooch and keep the puppies.
My system (see sig) did 1 minute 54 seconds.
Very interested about the Turbo-clocks... especially for the 4 core part.
This makes me feel a little better. My stock Intel i7 4770k did it in just under 1:30. I was going to throw my optimism out of the window if I saw a 8320 beat it or even come close to the same time since that would mean the benchmark was just favoring many-core systems over ipc. This will be very interesting if there was no smoke and mirror stuff going on at the event.
i5-6600k skylake at 4.4ghz, 16gb ram (2133? default timings I think) 1:48.87
Well that was fun - 2:17.92 (default settings)
I'm a bit sad now though.
my rig in sig 1:16.92
did i do something wrong?
i downloaded the .blend file from amd and hit f12.
Stock 6700K, 16GB DDR4-3000, Asus Ranger Maximus VIII. I turned off my overclock couple weeks ago. Might give it another go to see how it does in this.
Posted in the other thread, but 1:23:28 here on stock clocks.
Seeing others results somewhat justifies why I've stuck with X58 for so long lol
That's what happens when you have an engineer presenting. She's no Jerry Sanders. But at least she wore high heels.
Future looks a lot brighter for AMD and my stocks.
5930 K @ 3.7 all cores./ Mem 2600 at 14, 14, 14, 34, 1T.
did you guys run blender 32 or 64bit? I'm getting much faster times with the 32bit for some reason?!
1m37s on 2600k @ 4.6ghz.
Zen looks like a good upgrade for the $.
Just tried it on my sig rig. 32 bit looks to be about 3/4th of a second faster, 32.11 vs 31.40.
what does this have to do anything? Posting old pictures and repeating the FX drum? Seriously we all are optimistic about AMD bringing some real competition. Why can't you be a part of instead of same old negative bullshit. This thread goes great until I read your post. lol
Its like everyone is having fun with it. And here you come with same old pictures. lol
Fury was fine card. LOL only thing that was fucking wrong with it was price and the overclocking claims and amd's decision to go with HBM that raised costs. Performance wise it was right up there to be honest. AMD ruined it with HBM and price!
nope RX 480 was meant to perform like a fury. At no point I was expecting gtx 1080 performance from a GCN chip with 2300 shaders.
did you forget to see that they also showed a handbrake bench? Hate much? shit! lol. Okay it could still fail, but from this point on it will be a major fuckin disaster. I highly highly highly doubt that there is anything staged about this. May be they have to work on optimizing the boards with the chips other than that I see no evidence that Zen would be anything but a decent chip. You cant fuckin fail so hard twice, Design wise even Anandtech said, it looks really good on paper. Looks like its delivering in real life too.