AMD new CPU RYZEN using blender to render.


(BigBlend) #1

Starts at 25s.

Seems like it is faster than Intel but I hope it’s cheaper.


(SterlingRoth) #2

old news: https://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?407105-Blender-used-by-AMD-to-showcase-their-newest-chips&highlight=zen


(Esparadrapo) #3

That’s the old presentation.

Today’s:

http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon


(Ace Dragon) #4

If you feel like just reading the text, let me refer you to the new article at PC World.

By the looks of all of the positive things they have to say about it, I would say AMD really pulled it off this time and the early reveals was not just marketing hype. Hopefully it means a few years from now, I can get a new machine with upwards of several times the rendering power as my current one like in the past :smiley:


(pachupp) #5

you can try out file used in presentation
http://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/new-horizon
my pc
1:49s gtx1070
2:30s i5 2500k 4ghz

ryzen 0:35s so its impressive


(BeerBaron) #6

Make sure to adjust tile sizes for the GPU! In this scene, increasing the tiles to 256x256 gives me 20 seconds vs. 180 seconds on a GTX780.


(pachupp) #7

thanks BeerBaron, now on 1070 its 15s :smiley:
any way to make it faster that this? :stuck_out_tongue:

edit, 400x400 gives 13s


(lluc84) #8

That Ryzen cpu looks quite cool, looking forward to see how good are the reviews and price.

my RX 480 31 seg (400x400)


(BigBlend) #9

There is a rumor that their high end gpu will have the double computing power of nvidia titan x.

That will also be interesting how much they will cost. Now that OpenCL can render SSS and volumetrics.


(Lane) #10

Vega look promising, but its needed to see case who have been shown, the Deeplearning benchmark, if using FP16, TitanX ( Pascal ) dont have the same capacity of GP100 in FP16, so …

As for Zen ( Rysen ), it look promising, packed to with the SenseMi features, and ofc it seems ( for the few we have seen ) keep the promise… ( specially when we think that base clock is maybe not final and turbo boost clock was disabled… )

Ofc we will need to wait fulll reviews and all cases. But if price is good, it could well delivers, specially on workstation, server cases … ( racks shown with Vega + Naples are pretty impressive on numbers ).





(ambi) #11

The computer nerd in me is really interested in stuff like this https://www.parallella.org/2016/10/05/epiphany-v-a-1024-core-64-bit-risc-processor/

It may not be as good as GPU but probably will be more fun.


(Youssef Charles (يوسف تشرلز)) #12

I can’t wait to get one of AMD’s Zen CPUs!


(BigBlend) #13

I’m more of the power efficiently and lower heat and noise levels type of guy. Imagine having it render 24/7 and not worry about noise and high electrical bill.


(Ace Dragon) #14

From the articles I read, AMD has not turned on all of the software and other enhancements designed to boost performance yet (it will be interesting to see just how fast they can make this chip go once it’s ready for retail).


(Esparadrapo) #15

That’s… sad. 24.24 sec on a GTX 580.


(Roken) #16

I saw the news of Ryzen earlier today on Kitguru, so was pleased to see this thread. I’ve always been an AMD man (currently still on Phenom 965 x4). Having said that, I downloaded the demo and rendered straight on CPU, and it still managed a respectable 3:59 at stock speeds (Linux). I did a comparative GPU render on NV 670, which came in at 0:31. Now, my GPU has 4Gb, which means that for the majority (vast majority) of my renders, the GPU will handle it. Where I see Ryzen being of bigger benefit is in the transcoding, which at the moment, is still all CPU.

I’m not trying to sound critical, because I seriously need to upgrade now (and yes, I know the 965 is still a fast chip), and I’ve been considering splashing out a serious amount of money on Intel (it means a full platform upgrade, at Intel prices), so I’m going to be watching this closely. For the sake of a couple of months, I could half my upgrade costs, since AMD MBs and processors are historically a LOT cheaper than Intel, and DDR3 is now cheaper than DDR2. My drives etc. can all be re-used (SSD still at 540 read and write, with a WD 1Gb drive amongst others, so still fast spinners).

EDIT: And an upgrade of MB will enable dual GPU, which means that I can mix my 660 with my 670. Since the difference between the two is marginal, I’ll get a decent performance boost there.

I’m looking forward to more news and tests.


(interbert) #17

Not bad for my Intel i7 6800k 00.46.02 seconds



(Ace Dragon) #18

A followup article after the demonstration

What we know is that so far, AMD’s new chip matches Intel in terms of the fab process as well as the core and thread count, followed by a supposedly slight advantage in base clock speeds. Intel meanwhile has the upper hand in terms of how much RAM it can handle, and whether they keep the advantage in the turbo clocks remain unknown.

Of course, we also don’t know just how much faster the chip can go with its auto-tuning software either (all of this may not be revealed until next year).


(Grzesiek) #19

I’m really really happy for AMD. If indeed they offer good price for the CPU. Worst part I just got my self a dual CPU Xeon system with Intel’s E5-2687W (gen 1) so… each cpu at 150w… overall performance will be far beyond AMD’s or intels 6x00 setup. But dam, AMD did a nice work on that. I so have to test that blender file once i finish the xeon build (waiting for coolers)


(Grzesiek) #20

I’m really really happy for AMD. If indeed they offer good price for the CPU. Worst part I just got my self a dual CPU Xeon system with Intel’s E5-2687W (gen 1) so… each cpu at 150w… overall performance will be far beyond AMD’s or intels 6x00 setup. But dam, AMD did a nice work on that. I so have to test that blender file once i finish the xeon build (waiting for coolers)