AMD™ Ryzen© Blender® Benchmark Scores™©® Thread

3930K 4.2ghz //// 01:25:88
980ti was significantly slower... over 2 mins and something. I quit out of shame. It could be a setting somewhere though.


3930k 4.6ghz 01:04:59

Clocks matter but this Sandy Bridge is geting too damned slow.
 
Last edited:
No, Ryzen plays ball with the 8-core broadwell-E, stock versus stock.

No that is not accurate. The 6900K has turbo enabled and the Zen did not have it enabled. It would have been even more faster if AMD boost were enabled.
 
I guess this is why the difference. Also understandable for live testing since faster but they should have clearly said what setting they used.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...zen-benchmarks.2482739/page-116#post-38629977
CatMerc said:
b6cc8f9b_zensample.png


Mystery solved. I managed to extract a clear enough image from PCPer's video, and although I could clearly see 100 from just zooming in, I did my best to enhance the image.
 
That makes my 3930k go from 1:08 to 34s, which is too good compared to the presentation results.
It's still not 100% sure what settings they used. This at least explains part of it.
 
Decreasing to 100 samples made my i7-4770 go down to 49.89 seconds. Took 55.51 seconds on my Titan X, 95 seconds at 200 samples.
 
i7 4770K @ 4.6GHz / DDR3 1600

@ Render Samples 100

37.85 (37 seconds)

----------------

@ Render Samples 200 (Default)

1:14:51 (1 minute and 14 seconds)
 
Default Blender settings

I7 6700 stock speeds: 1:21.92

I7 6700K @ 4.6ghz: 1:06.53
 
Last edited:
The OP should change the settings to include the render samples = 100. Most people will be running at default of 200 and thinking that Ryzen is twice as fast as anything out there.
 
Well I think we are still waiting for AMD's response to the sample size question. So everybody just calm down. Kyle needs some sleep!
 
The OP should change the settings to include the render samples = 100. Most people will be running at default of 200 and thinking that Ryzen is twice as fast as anything out there.
Maybe that is the smoke and mirrors.
 
The OP should change the settings to include the render samples = 100. Most people will be running at default of 200 and thinking that Ryzen is twice as fast as anything out there.
At setting of 100, everything else default, I7 6700K at 4.6ghz 3000mhz ram gets: 00:33.17

Wouldn't that be faster than Zen? My 4core processor kicking some too then.
 
1:55.75

Intel Core I7 930
8GB DDR3 1333Mhz CAS9 Triple Channel (4 modules though)
 
Blender crashes on the FX9590 machine :cry: . hmmm wonder if Blender is a good stability tester?
 
I did it for shits and giggles on my 4.4ghz G3258 and got 3:53.74.

lolol.

edit: 1:57.13 at 100 samples.
 
Because I am an idiot who is easily amused, I ran it on my G4400 dual core and my GPUs. Everything is stock for all four runtypes.

GTX 780 Ti - 2:52.39
i7 2600k - 2:05.15
G4400 - 4:54.02
GTX 1050 Ti - 1:59.27

hmm.. my 760GTX 4gb just beat your 780ti. That's wacky. I got 2:21.65
 
1.14 with 200
38 with 100

4790k 4.6

How ever did have a nvidia driver crash a couple of times ....strange as system as been stable for years
 
Blender crashes on the FX9590 machine :cry: . hmmm wonder if Blender is a good stability tester?
I've had a few crashes on my sig machine, as well. I also got my first ever blue screen of death in Windows 10.
 
51.45 for my 2600k with the 100 sampling. Bittersweet score to be honest. It's still a respectable time, and yet even the latest and greatest don't seem to be worth the idea of upgrading any more :( having it be 3-4x faster is noteworthy, maybe 1.5x is significantly less so.
 
i7-3770K running stock with process priority set to real-time for Blender 64bit



RYZEN Blender 2.png
 
Last edited:
blender scores.png


Top is default blender; bottom is adjusted to 100 samples. 5820k @ 4.3 GHz 3200 MHz memory
 
Blender crashes on the FX9590 machine :cry: . hmmm wonder if Blender is a good stability tester?
I've had a few crashes on my sig machine, as well. I also got my first ever blue screen of death in Windows 10.

Damn that sux, I haven't gotten a blue screen of death yet with Windows 10 outside of a really old system with the win 10 anniversary edition but that was due to a hard drive failure.
 
Damn that sux, I haven't gotten a blue screen of death yet with Windows 10 outside of a really old system with the win 10 anniversary edition but that was due to a hard drive failure.
I will try tomorrow with SLI off, maybe a conflict.
 
Back
Top