Author Topic: AMD Ryzen 7 series and Corona?  (Read 64454 times)

2017-04-28, 17:13:52
Reply #60

Serj-3DVision

  • Primary Certified Instructor
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • 3DVision
In one word - perfect.
Corona benchmark in 2:38 without OC on box cooler, which is for me just excellent do his job.

Sergei Scennikov | Israel | Tel-Aviv
Primary certified instructor
3DVision | Corona Materials Library

2017-04-29, 02:35:49
Reply #61

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 962
    • View Profile
Awesome.
Thanks.

Do you feel at all in single threaded operations that you're a bit sluggish or not really?


2017-04-29, 15:26:32
Reply #62

twoheads

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
In one word - perfect.
Corona benchmark in 2:38 without OC on box cooler, which is for me just excellent do his job.

Do you intend to OC your ryzen in the future?

2017-04-30, 07:02:47
Reply #63

Serj-3DVision

  • Primary Certified Instructor
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • 3DVision
In one word - perfect.
Corona benchmark in 2:38 without OC on box cooler, which is for me just excellent do his job.

Do you intend to OC your ryzen in the future?

Not sure, maybe. For now it's just more just enough for me.


lupaz - for me no any noticeable difference between my new ryzen and old i7 4790K in software that i use.
Sergei Scennikov | Israel | Tel-Aviv
Primary certified instructor
3DVision | Corona Materials Library

2017-05-02, 05:58:17
Reply #64

Christa Noel

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 911
  • God bless us everyone
    • View Profile
    • dionch.studio
Not sure, maybe. For now it's just more just enough for me.


lupaz - for me no any noticeable difference between my new ryzen and old i7 4790K in software that i use.

ryzen 1700 = i7 4790K ??
did you mean the renderspeed doesn't has noticeable difference too?
I saw the corona benchmark, there is some difference there if I'm not wrong..

2017-05-02, 10:54:53
Reply #65

Serj-3DVision

  • Primary Certified Instructor
  • Active Users
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • 3DVision
Not sure, maybe. For now it's just more just enough for me.


lupaz - for me no any noticeable difference between my new ryzen and old i7 4790K in software that i use.

ryzen 1700 = i7 4790K ??
did you mean the renderspeed doesn't has noticeable difference too?
I saw the corona benchmark, there is some difference there if I'm not wrong..

I answered to lupaz question about single thread tasks speed feeling.

In multi-thread tasks like render for sure my 1700 about 2 times faster then i7 4790k.
Sergei Scennikov | Israel | Tel-Aviv
Primary certified instructor
3DVision | Corona Materials Library

2017-05-02, 16:34:57
Reply #66

Nejc Kilar

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
    • My personal website
If I may chime in with my own opinion here... :)

A good indicator for a CPU speed in terms of rendering performance is also Cinebench - that includes single threaded performance.

The numbers you get there clearly indicate that the 4790k is faster than even the 1800x. Heck, the 4790k is faster than the 6950x ... In single threaded apps that is.

Now, I think the question to be asked here is whether you really care about that? So, say you get 20fps in your viewport heavy scene (specially true for c4d) and now your new CPU is 15% slower in single threaded speed.

Effectively, you are probably leaving what, 2-5 fps on the table?

Same goes for Photoshop. That dual Xeon build on 3.2ghz max is making your lens blur be slower for X seconds... Say you need to wait 6 seconds more on a 40 second effect.

So... Are those seconds really that important compared to you rendering 2 hours instead of 4 hours? Think about IR and those quick region renders that you need asap...

In that case I'd argue that multi-core speed will probably save you more time in the end.

Of course, there is no perfect tool (=hardware) for everyone. For me, personally, I'd rather balance the scale because the work I do includes the need for fast single threaded speed too. I mean overall, its good to have a well balanced rig and again, personally, I think the Ryzen series will give you that.

To be honest, comparing something like a 1800x will pull you into heavy Xeon territory with regards to prices. Then again, if you pick up a 2699 with 3.6-3.8 ghz of single threaded speed then of course, its going to be pulling close / ahead of Ryzen in both multi-core and single thread speeds... Just for a lot more money, of course.

That is why workstations usually balance the two, to an extent (you generally don't put 2.8ghz XX-core Xeons ni your workstation - although it might work dandy for a lot of people I guess). You either take a little bit of that multi-core power to enhance the single threaded stuff... or vice versa, depending on what you prefer really.

I don't want to make this a marketing post for Ryzen so I'll conclude by saying that if you were rolling on a 4790k (or 6700k or 7700k) then good luck finding that same single threaded speed in a 20 core Xeon. Will you notice it in your workflow? That is another question... Perhaps a nvme would speed things up more depending on what you do :)

Oh and PS: If you are doing a lot of sim work, marvelous designer type of stuff... Yeah, you NEED single threaded performance! Ryzen does have very good single threaded performance - The IPC is in the Broadwell-E range afaik.

And for some numbers:
(https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CC-2017-Intel-Core-i7-7700K-i5-7600K-Performance-879/)

Just my five cents :) Hope it helps and don't forget, everything is debatable :)
Nejc Kilar | chaos-corona.com
Educational Content Creator | contact us

2017-05-02, 23:16:49
Reply #67

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 962
    • View Profile
Now, I think the question to be asked here is whether you really care about that? So, say you get 20fps in your viewport heavy scene (specially true for c4d) and now your new CPU is 15% slower in single threaded speed.

Effectively, you are probably leaving what, 2-5 fps on the table?

Thanks.
I'm not sure why you talk about fps though. I thought that was purely the video card.

In any case, I find that most operations in all software are single threaded, except for rendering. And those are the only times I need to wait. With corona IR, I can still see something without waiting much.
Once I want to render a full image, I just use a separate computer. 4hs or 6hs, I almost don't care.

I will go for a Ryzen too nevertheless. Everyone is talking wonders about it.
I was thinking on getting the 1700 as it comes with the cooler and when OCd gets close to the 1800x. Is this still the case or the 1800x was inproved? Do you know?

Thanks!

2017-05-03, 08:31:06
Reply #68

Nejc Kilar

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
    • My personal website
Now, I think the question to be asked here is whether you really care about that? So, say you get 20fps in your viewport heavy scene (specially true for c4d) and now your new CPU is 15% slower in single threaded speed.

Effectively, you are probably leaving what, 2-5 fps on the table?

Thanks.
I'm not sure why you talk about fps though. I thought that was purely the video card.


Yup, valid point but that was just one example. If you are using 3ds max then yes, the CPU performance in that regard is less important compared to the GPU but in Cinema 4D for example (my main package) the CPU is suprisingly pulling a lot of weight for a lot of the operations that affect viewport fps.

Good catch though, if you are on 3ds max then you probably should focus on the Photoshop part of my post :P

edit:

Afaik the 1700 and 1800x are essentially the same chips. One was just able to get to a certain freq with less voltage / heat probably (they split these with binning at the factory). As always with OCing... You might get there but you also might not.

For the most part I think everyone gets to the 1800 levels though - do check the review sites.
« Last Edit: 2017-05-03, 12:53:41 by nkilar »
Nejc Kilar | chaos-corona.com
Educational Content Creator | contact us

2017-05-11, 15:34:33
Reply #69

cecofuli

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1577
    • View Profile
    • www.francescolegrenzi.com

2017-05-11, 18:03:15
Reply #70

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 962
    • View Profile
Thanks! I was just about to buy ryzen 1800x
I guess the wait will be worthwhile

2017-05-11, 19:27:39
Reply #71

cecofuli

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1577
    • View Profile
    • www.francescolegrenzi.com
In general I use this rule: don't buy and Day1 any product. Wait the second genearation/revision or, if we speak about software, some Service Pack.

But, if you have money in your wallet ^__^ , it's better to wait the two CPU AMD Ryzen, called Naples.
It's a SINGLE CPU 32 Core (4x Ryzen 7), in a dual socket motherboard.  But, we are speacking about +4000 euro WS, I think
I think that CPU will be really big "as a size".

« Last Edit: 2017-05-11, 19:32:01 by cecofuli »

2017-05-13, 07:51:49
Reply #72

Fritzlachatte

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Quote
it's better to wait the two CPU AMD Ryzen, called Naples

You are right, but there is a (very little) hope, those 16core CPUs could be in a less expensive region around <1000€, but the more I read ("Monstrous 4094 Pin Socket") I am afraid,
they just want to win the throne on the tower of power with a more INTELesque- Price. But the more on Ram and quadchannel etc. would be nice aswell. Hope I am just a croaker and the price is suitable.

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-16-core-threadripper-whitehaven-4094-socket/

2017-05-13, 17:51:21
Reply #73

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 962
    • View Profile
On that link there's a nice comparison table with ryzen. Whitehaven (threadripper) is 3.1 vs 3.6 in ryzen.
For a workstation looks like a big difference, no?

I'm trying to think if it's worth waiting or not.
 It's says there it's coming mid 2017,but we know how long it takes to make a product stable.

What do you think?

2017-05-13, 19:12:06
Reply #74

kothu

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
In one word - perfect.
Corona benchmark in 2:38 without OC on box cooler, which is for me just excellent do his job.
Glad to hear that! :). I am also trying to build with 1800x or 1700x at the end of this month. Have you test about heavy PS work? 4k with a lot of layers etc. I also have dual xeon e5 2683v3 (got from ebay). Multithread performance is great! but single thread is slow (only  over 110 on cinebench r15 :( ). feel laggy in PS with 4k and a lot of layers. And also in 3ds max viewport performance:(