Author Topic: Threadripper vs. i9  (Read 4118 times)

2019-11-27, 07:22:54

gabor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Hey Guys,
I have an intel i9-9900k workstation, and I just bought a Threadripper 2970wx just for rendering purposes. I'm rendering animations with Backburner on the two machines. And that's really odd. The i9 renders a frame in 8:40 minutes, and the Threadripper in 7:20 minutes.
I dont't know why the difference is so tiny between the two - because the 2970wx should almost be twice so fast as the i9. But it isn't. Sure, parsing scene takesmuch longer on the 2970wx: 1:48 minutes, and on the i9 ist's just 0:46 minutes. That's because on one thread the intel is much faster. Thats OK. But after that?
Both CPUs are running at stock speeds, no overclocking. I have 64 gigs of ram, and the latest Corona+3ds max. On Cinebench, and Corona benchmark, the 2970wx is twice as fast, as the i9. But those are just the benchmarks. Do you have any idea why? Thanks!

2019-11-27, 08:57:41
Reply #1

SnifferCZ

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
test render without backurber, local render, same frame. What time for I9 and Threadripper?

2019-11-27, 11:35:57
Reply #2

gabor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Almost the same, ca.5 seconds faster...

2019-11-27, 12:08:26
Reply #3

bcgi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
What kind of RAMs do you use for the Treadripper?

2019-11-27, 12:19:02
Reply #4

gabor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
G Skill, DDR4 64GB PC 3200 CL16 G.Skill KIT (4x16GB) 64GTZR Tri/Z, but it runs only at default speed of 2100 Mhz. I'm trying now at 2400, but I see no significant performance improvement.

2019-11-27, 15:05:33
Reply #5

bcgi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
You should run the RAMs at 2933 because that's the default for the Threadrippers. If you run them on a lower speed that can affect the performance a lot. Try to set them to 2933 and let's see what happens.


2019-11-28, 00:11:27
Reply #6

gabor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Now I'm pushing the CPU clock  to 3,5 Ghz, and the mem to 2933. Results are better now: 8:35 minutes on the i9, vs. 6:03 minutes on the threadripper. Thats better now, still yet not the double performance. But the Motherboard is getting really hot, the VRM goes up to 73°C after 30 minutes of rendering. Do you think it"s safe to it that way?

2019-11-28, 08:32:49
Reply #7

Vuk

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Scene probably loads faster on the i9 due to fatser single core max speed. Especially trough backburner for the first frame where the whole scene loads from scratch. Those results are ok. My 24/28 core dual  Xeon platinums are not that faster then the  WS i9's in animation rendering especially when the frames render in less then 10 minutes.

The double performance time you mention would probably happen if the frame took more then 30minutes to render. From those 6 minutes it took to render the frame 2 minutes where just scene parsing probably while the i9 did that in 1 minute :).

2019-11-28, 15:20:29
Reply #8

bcgi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Now I'm pushing the CPU clock  to 3,5 Ghz, and the mem to 2933. Results are better now: 8:35 minutes on the i9, vs. 6:03 minutes on the threadripper. Thats better now, still yet not the double performance. But the Motherboard is getting really hot, the VRM goes up to 73°C after 30 minutes of rendering. Do you think it"s safe to it that way?

2933 is the default FSB for the Threadripper 2. If you run it on lower speed you lose performance but it's up to you of course. If you are worrying about the motherboard's temperature you can always add some additional fans to cool it down.

2019-11-28, 16:36:55
Reply #9

gabor

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Alrght, thanks for the help!