Chaos Corona Forum
General Category => General CG Discussion => Hardware => Topic started by: tatarka on 2024-08-19, 22:01:29
-
Does anyone have this processor specifically for 3d work? What are your impressions?
There is no data on this processor on the corona benchmark scores.
-
I'm going to upgrade as soon as it will be available.
According to various available benchmarks, the maximum performance is about ~15% higher compared to the previous 7950x, but I wouldn't expect miracles.
If you're not 100% sure, I'd suggest waiting 2-3 months for the first user reviews to appear and any "raw" nuances to emerge, if any.
-
If you haven't yet, check this one for now:
"Core parking" :) hehehe
-
It's selling for $560 in Amazon.
I just bought one.
-
Hi guys, do we have any news on the 9950x? Did anyone test it?
-
It's selling for $560 in Amazon.
I just bought one.
With one ?
-
I bought one to replace old 3900X slave, little disappointed, 5-10% better than 7950X.
Air cooled with old Noctua D14, on MSI B650 Tomahawk, 2x48GB G.Skill FlareX5 5200CL40.
Corona benchmarks : 1.3 = 33 sec., v10 = 15.200.000 - 15.600.000 rays
Cinebench: R15 = 6897, R23 = 42.479, R24 = 2240, VRay5 = 34.165, VRay6 = 49.814
-
Do you get smooth material editor? Switching CoronaPhysicalMaterials? In and Outside of Interactive Rendering.
I am pondering buying one just to test how much better it works compared to Threadripper.
-
It's selling for $560 in Amazon.
I just bought one.
With one ?
Nevermind. The seller screw me and disappeared. First time this happened to me on Amazon. I got my money back though. Didn't buy a 9950x in the end.
-
Do you get smooth material editor? Switching CoronaPhysicalMaterials? In and Outside of Interactive Rendering.
I am pondering buying one just to test how much better it works compared to Threadripper.
Not sure that I understand what you mean, but it's look same to me as on 3900X, 5950X ...
I'm still on Cinema R19 and classic material editor (don't using nodes).
-
To the owners of 9950x, how does the performance of work and rendering compare to 7950x?
-
anyone have anny impresions ?
-
Based on reviews available online you'll be getting ~10% faster rendering compared to the 7950x. Not as huge as of a leap as we typically get but it is indeed still faster :)
-
I am interested in user opinion on how it works, how max and corona behave, whether there are any problems that would make me decide not to choose this processor :)
-
FYI, as per ChatGPT:
Both files contain data on the benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and 9950X, with key columns such as "raysPerSTotal" (benchmark score), "cpuFrequency," "physicalCores," and "ramFrequency."
I'll proceed by analyzing the average benchmark scores ("raysPerSTotal") and other key statistics for each processor to help you compare their performance.
Here’s the performance comparison between the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and 9950X based on their Corona benchmark scores:
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X:
Average benchmark score: 12,635,707
Score range: from 9,846,837 to 15,370,436
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X:
Average benchmark score: 16,068,239
Score range: from 14,049,010 to 17,591,136
The AMD 9950X shows a roughly 27% improvement in average performance over the 7950X, indicating a significant performance boost in rendering tasks.
-
I recently bought my 9950x.
After some tests (testing with 4 of my scenes), the improvement over the 7950x is 16-18%.
(Scene 1: 16.63% improvement
Scene 2: 17.71% improvement
Scene 3: 22.32% improvement
Scene 4: 16.44% improvement)
BUT, I didn't have the 7950x overclocked because the temps were already high at stock.
AMD claims the 9950x is more efficient so I enabled PBO, which led to a higher difference.
Hope this helps.
-
A little off-topic but I see this processor is not that far away in bencharks than my own threadripper 3970x that I bought for 3-4x the price (some years ago). Is the consumer line of AMDs now that capable?
-
A little off-topic but I see this processor is not that far away in bencharks than my own threadripper 3970x that I bought for 3-4x the price (some years ago). Is the consumer line of AMDs now that capable?
Pretty much yes I'd say. The Zen 2 Threadrippers are now like 5 years old and we had 3 succeeding Zen generations in between. The "problem" however is that the top end also got a lot faster which means sure, the 9950x is as fast / faster as the 3970x but then the top end chip is still like 2.75x faster than the 9950x :)
-
A little off-topic but I see this processor is not that far away in bencharks than my own threadripper 3970x that I bought for 3-4x the price (some years ago). Is the consumer line of AMDs now that capable?
Pretty much yes I'd say. The Zen 2 Threadrippers are now like 5 years old and we had 3 succeeding Zen generations in between. The "problem" however is that the top end also got a lot faster which means sure, the 9950x is as fast / faster as the 3970x but then the top end chip is still like 2.75x faster than the 9950x :)
They come with issues though, right? I mean, threadrippers. At least with corona. That's my impression after several years of reading here on the forum that those using them were not able to get the full performance. So I was always hesitant to spend that kind of money on more problems.
Is that true do you think?
-
I've been working on 2 3970x machines (identical) for 3-4 years now and I've had zero issues. The only thing is after long rendering sessions the frequency may drop to ~3.45GHz (less than the advertised 3.7) but that may be to cooling (using Noctuas NH-U14S single fan). Otherwise pretty stable system!
-
I've been working on 2 3970x machines (identical) for 3-4 years now and I've had zero issues. The only thing is after long rendering sessions the frequency may drop to ~3.45GHz (less than the advertised 3.7) but that may be to cooling (using Noctuas NH-U14S single fan). Otherwise pretty stable system!
Thanks.
I'll need to consider them the next time
-
I recently bought my 9950x.
After some tests (testing with 4 of my scenes), the improvement over the 7950x is 16-18%.
(Scene 1: 16.63% improvement
Scene 2: 17.71% improvement
Scene 3: 22.32% improvement
Scene 4: 16.44% improvement)
BUT, I didn't have the 7950x overclocked because the temps were already high at stock.
AMD claims the 9950x is more efficient so I enabled PBO, which led to a higher difference.
Hope this helps.
How is life with the 9950x so far Lupaz? I'm considering to build a new system with that cpu. What amount of ram and motherboard are you using?
-
I recently bought my 9950x.
After some tests (testing with 4 of my scenes), the improvement over the 7950x is 16-18%.
(Scene 1: 16.63% improvement
Scene 2: 17.71% improvement
Scene 3: 22.32% improvement
Scene 4: 16.44% improvement)
BUT, I didn't have the 7950x overclocked because the temps were already high at stock.
AMD claims the 9950x is more efficient so I enabled PBO, which led to a higher difference.
Hope this helps.
How is life with the 9950x so far Lupaz? I'm considering to build a new system with that cpu. What amount of ram and motherboard are you using?
All good. No issues that I can relate to the new CPU.
I have 64 MB of RAM. My motherboard is a GIGABYTE B650
I am considering adding 64 more RAM to be honest.
-
I recently bought my 9950x.
After some tests (testing with 4 of my scenes), the improvement over the 7950x is 16-18%.
(Scene 1: 16.63% improvement
Scene 2: 17.71% improvement
Scene 3: 22.32% improvement
Scene 4: 16.44% improvement)
BUT, I didn't have the 7950x overclocked because the temps were already high at stock.
AMD claims the 9950x is more efficient so I enabled PBO, which led to a higher difference.
Hope this helps.
How is life with the 9950x so far Lupaz? I'm considering to build a new system with that cpu. What amount of ram and motherboard are you using?
My short review. At first it worked great, I assembled it on the basis of Asus Rog Strix x870e-e + 4*48gb 6000 MT/s, which I was able to make work at 5200-5600MT/s without errors.
The raw performance is amazing.
The only thing that bothered me was a slightly lower score in the benchmark than my friends with the same cpu, despite the fact that my cooling system removes ~280 W of heat without a problem and I got a fairly good (Gold/Platinum) silicon sample with good curve offsets, but I can’t make it give a higher result no matter what I do.
I also encountered problems lately, I use Win11 23H2, and disabled core parking and on the latest Corona updates my workflow with enabled interactive rendering became laggy (like for many other users of this CPU, as far as I know). In the end, only turning off XMP profile and returning the RAM frequencies to 3600 helped me, which further reduced the result in the benchmark.
Now I'm looking at the 9950X3D, considering the tests that appear recently after the release (it shows even better results than the regular 9950x), I'll probably buy it for the main workstation and put my 9950x in the secondary one.
-
thank you for the update, I think I will go for the 9950x3d too
-
A little off-topic but I see this processor is not that far away in bencharks than my own threadripper 3970x that I bought for 3-4x the price (some years ago). Is the consumer line of AMDs now that capable?
Pretty much yes I'd say. The Zen 2 Threadrippers are now like 5 years old and we had 3 succeeding Zen generations in between. The "problem" however is that the top end also got a lot faster which means sure, the 9950x is as fast / faster as the 3970x but then the top end chip is still like 2.75x faster than the 9950x :)
They come with issues though, right? I mean, threadrippers. At least with corona. That's my impression after several years of reading here on the forum that those using them were not able to get the full performance. So I was always hesitant to spend that kind of money on more problems.
Is that true do you think?
There's been issues in the past yes but at the same time not everyone experienced these issues in the same way.
Some were bigger like in C4D where we had noticeable issues with SMT / more than 64 threads and that really prevented you from working. Some users were affected while others not which made figuring stuff out rather hard. That said, it is fixed now.
Then we had some issues on certain newer builds in 3ds Max where the UI was quite stuttery although IIRC it wasn't just Threadrippers affected. That should also be fixed now.
There's still things the team is looking into, like a faster UX in general that seemingly affects Threadripper users more than others (sometimes disabling SMT can help speed things up a bit). Then again, we also have Threadripper users that don't notice these issues at all so... It kinda depends but nonetheless arguably the things we are trying to improve now aren't showstoppers necessarly.
I'm on a 5995WX and I very much appreciate the fast(er) IR and overall rendering experience :)
-
thank you for the update, I think I will go for the 9950x3d too
corona engine don't use extra AMD 3D V-Cache Technology that come with x3d.. i think
-
Seems like it does perform better anyway:
https://www.techspot.com/review/2965-amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d/
-
thank you for the update, I think I will go for the 9950x3d too
In any case, I would recommend waiting for the mass benchmark results. It is quite possible that reviewers now just have selected samples of chips and all the advantage over 9950x is explained by this (for the same reason, my sample is just slightly worse than others). And I do not see objective reasons why it should give a result better than 9950x. In the end we don't know at what settings of curve offsets and PBO limits and with what cooling the existing benchmarks were executed and what had to be done to achieve frequencies of 5.45-5.5 GHz
After all, this processor is mostly a marketing story, since it is the most expensive in the line but offers gaming performance identical to a much cheaper 9800X3D, which means that it will be in demand only among enthusiasts who need both productivity and gaming performance (in other words, who just want the best possible from the non-HEDT segment because there is no objective sense for any other group of buyers to overpay for it) and AMD can create artificial hype around it for this reason (this certainly sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it definitely worked for me :D)
-
cheers marchik, good insight! Should (in theory) any 6000mhz cl 30 48gb modules work in a 4x configuration? If having to lower ram speeds as you did, does that have a real life performance slow down in production work or is it just for gamers? (I don't care about the gaming performance).
Reason I ask is that the modules I saw by other reddit user who managed to run 4x48gb at 6000mhz, is currently sold out.
-
cheers marchik, good insight! Should (in theory) any 6000mhz cl 30 48gb modules work in a 4x configuration? If having to lower ram speeds as you did, does that have a real life performance slow down in production work or is it just for gamers? (I don't care about the gaming performance).
Reason I ask is that the modules I saw by other reddit user who managed to run 4x48gb at 6000mhz, is currently sold out.
I think that with timing selection and OC skills, you can run a lot of RAM sticks at 6000 MHz, but among the "plug & play" solutions I only know that recently Biwin announced 192GB DDR5-6000 and DDR5-6400 memory kits, but they are not yet on sale (and I'm not sure that any motherboard can handle them). Personally, I use 4*48 GB VENGEANCE 6000 CL30 AMD EXPO CMK96GX5M2B6000Z30 (2 different kits of 2 sticks) and it works quite well, I think with experience you can make them work at 6000, it will just take days or weeks of fine tuning.
Memory speed does not dramatically affect performance in our tasks, within 3% I would say. This is purely a race for numbers and ego.
For most users, a 4*48 set generally works at 3600 or 4400, so there is no reason to complain. But now almost all boards with 8+ PCB layers can withstand 5200 without problems, and this is already enough.
and by the way, I noticed that the latest BIOS updates for my motherboard claim support for 256 GB kits (4x64GB), and I think I've already seen them on sale (I can't confirm for sure right now, I need to study this issue in more detail), so soon we'll be chasing completely different ddr volumes and solving other problems :D
ps can you please provide a link to the reddit thread you were talking about?
-
ps can you please provide a link to the reddit thread you were talking about?
It's this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1i1cmwi/9950x_with_192gb_4x48gb_at_expo_6000cl30_stable/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1i1cmwi/9950x_with_192gb_4x48gb_at_expo_6000cl30_stable/)
64gb pr stick on sounds crazy for am5, but maybe worth waiting a couple of months to see what happens? But then again, we can always juuust wait a bit longer for something new and better. My old xeon at home (which this build will replace) scores only 5mil rays in the corona benchmark, and running on 64gb 3200mhz ram :D So no matter what, I will feel the upgrade. Last night I was tempted to just go with a 9900x and 2x48gb and save a lot of money and probably headache. The 9900x is almost half price of the 9950x3d and I would still get over 2x performance compared to my old system. With ai upscaling, I don't see a huge need to be able to render out more than 3-4k native and for that I think the 9900x might be enough and use the saved money to save up for a better gpu. End of day it's only for the occasional freelance job, but I can feel the old pc at home is troubled + win10 updates will end this year and it so old its not allowed to upgrade. Curious if the 9000 series will have smoother IR and material editor performance than the 3990x threadrippers we use at work.
-
ps can you please provide a link to the reddit thread you were talking about?
It's this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1i1cmwi/9950x_with_192gb_4x48gb_at_expo_6000cl30_stable/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1i1cmwi/9950x_with_192gb_4x48gb_at_expo_6000cl30_stable/)
64gb pr stick on sounds crazy for am5, but maybe worth waiting a couple of months to see what happens? But then again, we can always juuust wait a bit longer for something new and better. My old xeon at home (which this build will replace) scores only 5mil rays in the corona benchmark, and running on 64gb 3200mhz ram :D So no matter what, I will feel the upgrade. Last night I was tempted to just go with a 9900x and 2x48gb and save a lot of money and probably headache. The 9900x is almost half price of the 9950x3d and I would still get over 2x performance compared to my old system. With ai upscaling, I don't see a huge need to be able to render out more than 3-4k native and for that I think the 9900x might be enough and use the saved money to save up for a better gpu. End of day it's only for the occasional freelance job, but I can feel the old pc at home is troubled + win10 updates will end this year and it so old its not allowed to upgrade. Curious if the 9000 series will have smoother IR and material editor performance than the 3990x threadrippers we use at work.
I just looked and saw that I have exactly this memory, as described in this post on reddit. I'll try to overclock it :D In any case, I advise you to take at least 9950x, even without x3d and high overclocking, this is a processor with exceptional performance for its power consumption.
I hope that soon all these lags when working with it in Corona will be fixed.
By the way, I saw that in the neighboring topic you were choosing a case and a cooling system for a quiet build. I'm using the FD Meshify XL 2 with dark tempered glass (I'm also a fan of the "Big Black Box That Works"). There are no fancy RGB lights, it's very well ventilated, and there's enough room for 2*420 radiators and any GPU.
I assume you're leaning toward air cooling, but I can recommend you my setup. I'm using the Arctic Liquid Freezer 420 III without RGB lights, and it cost me under $100 on Amazon. I also bought 2 sets of 5 high-speed 140 mm Arctic P14 Max fans for $45 per set. And 2 Arctic fan controllers for $9 each to control them. So, 6 fans are on the AIO radiator in a push-pull configuration, 3 fans are in the front of the case for intake, and another 1 is in the back for exhaust.
So for ~$200 I got a cooling system that dissipates 260 watts of heat in virtually silent mode. It would seem that 10 fans should make a lot of noise and yes, at 3000 RPM it sounds like a jet engine. But the trick is that each fan up to 1000 RPM is virtually silent and even at these speeds it transfers quite a large volume of air (especially considering the number of fans), and the area of the large 420 * 38 mm radiator is enough to dissipate a lot of heat without actually turning on the fans. Therefore, under everyday load without rendering (web surfing, single-core applications, etc.) the fans are almost always off or are within 600 RPM) And when rendering I raise the speed to 1000-1400 RPM and they remain very quiet.
Considering that I also have PBO activated and the limits are disabled, I believe that in stock mode within 200-220W it will work almost silently.
-
fantastic feedback Marchik, it's exactly this experience I wanted to hear from people. Thanks again for taking the time helping out on this build. Much appreciated :)