Maxon’s widespread Cinebench CPU benchmarking program simply were given a long-overdue replace to carry it as much as parity with trendy PCs. We’ve already attempted it, on two of essentially the most tough CPUs you’ll be able to purchase these days, and feature effects to percentage, along side some ancient context and pointers for the usage of it with your individual CPU.
A bit Cinebench historical past
The unfastened Cinebench R20 app is meant to interchange Cinebench R15, which first noticed provider in 2013. To come up with an concept of ways a long way we’ve are available , the top-end desktop CPU in 2013 used to be a quad-core, 4th-gen Haswell Core i7, whilst an enthusiast-level chip used to be a six-core Third-gen Ivy Bridge-E Core i7.
These days, Intel’s top-cat client CPU is the Core i9-9980XE (to be had on Amazon) with 18 cores. And even though now not actually supposed for customers with out the checking account of Invoice Gates, the corporate additionally simply driven a 28-core Xeon W-3175X.
AMD, in the meantime, is making Eight-core CPUs rain and gives a 32-core Threadripper 2990WX for high-end customers at a crazy-reasonable value.
To stay Cinebench R20 extra related, the corporate has higher the workload complexity, higher reminiscence use, and followed the most recent rendering engine from the product it’s in accordance with: Cinema 4D R20. The engine itself options enhance for Intel’s Embree raytracing generation, which has additionally been followed via Valve, AutoDesk, UbiSoft, V-ray, Blender, and Corona, amongst others. Underneath the hood, the R20 engine helps AVX, AVX2, and AVX512 instruction units. As a result of we will by no means have sufficient, the benchmark now helps as much as 256 render threads.
Maxon’s Cinebench refresh arrives with some ancient luggage. At one level, earlier variations of Cinebench have been tainted via accusations that it hobbled AMD efficiency via the usage of the Intel compiler, which preferred Intel’s CPUs over AMD’s. Maxon, on the other hand, denied this and instructed PCWorld in 2017 that in spite of what the FTC maintained, it didn’t use the notorious “CPU ID” choices that preferred Intel chips.
It’s all water underneath the bridge now, as AMD itself used Cinebench R15 to reveal simply how briskly its Ryzen CPUs have been. Maxon claims all is peace and unity. “Maxon additionally works very carefully with Intel and AMD to check Cinebench on now not simplest the latest CPUs however the following technology as neatly. This permits Maxon and Cinema 4D to stick at the innovative and ship the efficiency required to fulfill the tip manufacturing firms,” Maxon officers instructed us.
Home windows Retailer simplest
Something that’s positive to lift some blood power is how you’ll be able to—and will’t—get Cinebench. Prior to now, someone may just obtain Cinebench R15 and set up it as a standalone Win32 app. With Cinebench R20, the unfastened benchmark can simplest be downloaded without delay in the course of the Home windows Retailer. (Cinebench R15 remained unchanged for years, with the one replace coming after Apple broke the installer on MacOS.)
You don’t need to log in or create a Home windows Retailer account to put in it. However you do want Web get entry to, and also you don’t have any keep watch over over variations. If Cinebench R20.1 got here out in six months, it might invalidate your earlier checks, as a result of you’ll be able to’t run the older model.
We requested Maxon officers a couple of standalone installer, and the solution wasn’t encouraging. “It’s in doubt Maxon will probably be liberating a standalone Win32 installer model presently. Cineware is a spinoff of Maxon’s flagship product Cinema 4D, used to create ‘high-end’ 3-d animation,” Maxon officers instructed PCWorld. “Cineware is supposed to check the and OS artists will in reality be the usage of in manufacturing. Creatives are continuously pushing the limits of and OS efficiency. Subsequently, Cinebench too will have to push the ones limitations in an effort to supply correct comparisons.”
Whilst the consistent updates will annoy skilled reviewers, there’s some other factor that may rankle much more. Maxon forbids benchmarking websites from posting stand-alone versions of the test. It’s UWP or bust.
Cinebench R20 on 28-core Xeon W-3175X and 32-core Threadripper 2990WX
Make no mistake, Cinebench R20 is a big change–a tougher test for today’s faster CPUs. To see how big a difference it makes, we fired up a 28-core Xeon W-3175X and a 32-core Threadripper 2990WX to test on both Cinebench R15 and Cinebench R20.
Like Cinebench R15, Cinebench R20 features a single static scene that is rendered out. In the chart below, you see the performance of the 32-core Threadripper 2990WX and the performance in red, and Intel’s Xeon W-3175X in blue. The shorter bars are Cinebench R15 (also freshly run on the machines), while the longer bars are Cinebench R20.
With Cinebench R15, the Xeon W-3175X clocks in just under 3.6 percent faster. We’d call that a tie mostly. With Cinebench R20, the margin increases to just under 10 percent in favor of the 28-core Xeon W-3175X. That’s a decent uptick in performance for the Xeon over Threadripper. When you remember that the Xeon has 28 cores vs. the Threadripper’s 32, it’s not a great look for Threadripper.
That’s just the default test, using all of the CPU cores available. We also ran the test’s optional single-threaded test. Cinebench R20 surprisingly puts the Threadripper 2990WX slightly ahead by about 2 percent—which again—is well within the margin of error, and what we’d consider a tie. Still, that’s a decent swing from Cinebench R15, which put the Xeon W-3175X ahead by just under 10 percent.
We’re actually surprised by the score here, as we thought the higher clock speeds of the Xeon W-3175X would easily put it ahead. It’s possible the Xeon’s performance actually loses some ground in single-threaded tests when AVX, AVX2 or AVX512 is used, as Intel allows the CPU to shift down for the more difficult AVX workloads.
Maxon said the test increases the computational workload eightfold. In casual observation, we noted about 5GB of RAM being used during runs on both machines. Power consumption didn’t seem to change much: Both systems hit similar peaks between Cinebench R15 and Cinebench R20.
Total time to run on the 28-core Xeon W-3175X was about 29 seconds, while the 32-core Threadripper 2990WX took about 32 seconds. For comparison, Cinebench R15 runs on the Xeon and Threadripper took about 9 seconds, respectively.
One last thing we should note is how the new version jettisons OpenGL performance testing. That’s a small loss, as OpenGL on consumer-level graphics cards in Windows has always been lackluster. For those who want to measure OpenGL GPU performance, other tests will do a better job.
How to run Cinebench R20
If you’re ready to dip your toes into the testing waters, Cinebench R20 is a great start. To install it, simply go to the Windows Store and search for “Cinebench,” and install it.
Once installed, you should reboot your machine, and disconnect it from the network to prevent it from updating in the background. It’s also recommended that you disable or pause virus testing, and shut down other applications to prevent them from influencing the score.
When ready, fire up Cinebench from the Start menu and push the Run button. You should run the test at least three times and average all three if you’re looking for more reliable results. If you’re looking for pure performance runs, give the machine a minute or two between runs (consider even longer rest periods on a laptop.)
To measure single-core performance, select File > Advanced benchmark, which will reveal a button for CPU (Single Core).
To stress-test your system, go into File > Preferences and set a Minimum Test Duration. Set, say, 3,600 seconds, and Cinebench R20 will loop the workload on the given amount of threads for an hour.
Interpreting Cinebench R20 results
When talking about the results you get from a 3D rendering test, you should put it in the proper perspective. Cinebench R20 is a test to measure how a computer (Windows 10 or MacOS) renders 3D using the latest CPU instruction sets. It’s not a GPU test. It’s not an SSD test. It’s almost purely a CPU test that tells you how a PC will perform rendering 3D models.
That doesn’t necessarily tell you how a PC will operate in Microsoft Office or Google Chrome or even Photoshop, because very few consumer-level applications will actually scale to the number of cores available today.
Still, as a tool to measure approximate levels of performance under multi-threaded loads (and single-threaded loads) it’s a repeatable, reliable test and a welcome update from Cinebench R15.