ddd AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core testing with a ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI (1416 BIOS) and NVIDIA NV174 8GB on Ubuntu 23.10 via the Phoronix Test Suite. a: Processor: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core @ 5.88GHz (16 Cores / 32 Threads), Motherboard: ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI (1416 BIOS), Chipset: AMD Device 14d8, Memory: 32GB, Disk: 2000GB Samsung SSD 980 PRO 2TB, Graphics: AMD Radeon 16GB (2124/1218MHz), Audio: AMD Navi 31 HDMI/DP, Monitor: DELL U2723QE, Network: Intel I225-V + Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX210/AX211/AX411 OS: Ubuntu 23.10, Kernel: 6.6.0-phx-bcachefs (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 45.0, Display Server: X Server + Wayland, OpenGL: 4.6 Mesa 23.2.1-1ubuntu3 (LLVM 15.0.7 DRM 3.54), Compiler: GCC 13.2.0 + LLVM 16.0.6, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 3840x2160 b: Processor: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core @ 5.88GHz (16 Cores / 32 Threads), Motherboard: ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI (1416 BIOS), Chipset: AMD Device 14d8, Memory: 32GB, Disk: 2000GB Samsung SSD 980 PRO 2TB, Graphics: AMD Radeon 16GB (2124/1218MHz), Audio: AMD Navi 31 HDMI/DP, Monitor: DELL U2723QE, Network: Intel I225-V + Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX210/AX211/AX411 OS: Ubuntu 23.10, Kernel: 6.6.0-phx-bcachefs (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 45.0, Display Server: X Server + Wayland, OpenGL: 4.6 Mesa 23.2.1-1ubuntu3 (LLVM 15.0.7 DRM 3.54), Compiler: GCC 13.2.0 + LLVM 16.0.6, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 3840x2160 s: Processor: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core @ 5.88GHz (16 Cores / 32 Threads), Motherboard: ASUS ROG STRIX X670E-E GAMING WIFI (1416 BIOS), Chipset: AMD Device 14d8, Memory: 32GB, Disk: 2000GB Samsung SSD 980 PRO 2TB + 4001GB Western Digital WD_BLACK SN850X 4000GB, Graphics: NVIDIA NV174 8GB, Audio: NVIDIA GA104 HD Audio, Monitor: DELL U2723QE, Network: Intel I225-V + Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX210/AX211/AX411 OS: Ubuntu 23.10, Kernel: 6.7.0-060700rc2daily20231127-generic (x86_64), Desktop: GNOME Shell 45.1, Display Server: X Server 1.21.1.7 + Wayland, Display Driver: nouveau, OpenGL: 4.3 Mesa 24.0~git2311260600.945288~oibaf~m (git-945288f 2023-11-26 mantic-oibaf-ppa), Compiler: GCC 13.2.0 + LLVM 16.0.6, File-System: ext4, Screen Resolution: 3840x2160 FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx264 - Scenario: Live FPS > Higher Is Better a . 308.92 |=================================================================== b . 307.75 |=================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx265 - Scenario: Live FPS > Higher Is Better a . 189.62 |================================================================== b . 193.02 |=================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx264 - Scenario: Upload FPS > Higher Is Better a . 18.21 |=================================================================== b . 18.52 |==================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx265 - Scenario: Upload FPS > Higher Is Better a . 36.72 |==================================================================== b . 36.77 |==================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx264 - Scenario: Platform FPS > Higher Is Better a . 70.58 |==================================================================== b . 70.50 |==================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx265 - Scenario: Platform FPS > Higher Is Better a . 75.33 |==================================================================== b . 74.81 |==================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx264 - Scenario: Video On Demand FPS > Higher Is Better a . 70.72 |==================================================================== b . 70.75 |==================================================================== FFmpeg 6.1 Encoder: libx265 - Scenario: Video On Demand FPS > Higher Is Better a . 75.21 |==================================================================== b . 75.16 |==================================================================== Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Composite Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 5660.58 |================================================================== b . 5653.55 |================================================================== Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Monte Carlo Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 2346.34 |================================================================== b . 2351.47 |================================================================== Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Fast Fourier Transform Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 470.52 |=================================================================== b . 471.56 |=================================================================== Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Sparse Matrix Multiply Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 3936.57 |================================================================== b . 3912.13 |================================================================== Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Dense LU Matrix Factorization Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 18996.73 |================================================================= b . 18979.83 |================================================================= Java SciMark 2.2 Computational Test: Jacobi Successive Over-Relaxation Mflops > Higher Is Better a . 2552.76 |================================================================== b . 2552.76 |================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Jython msec < Lower Is Better a . 3659 |===================================================================== b . 3608 |==================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Eclipse msec < Lower Is Better a . 7098 |===================================================================== b . 7066 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: GraphChi msec < Lower Is Better a . 2131 |===================================================================== b . 2112 |==================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Tradesoap msec < Lower Is Better a . 2361 |===================================================================== b . 2297 |=================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Tradebeans msec < Lower Is Better a . 3370 |===================================================================== b . 3383 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Spring Boot msec < Lower Is Better a . 1329 |===================================================================== b . 1306 |==================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Kafka msec < Lower Is Better a . 6297 |===================================================================== b . 6299 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Tomcat msec < Lower Is Better a . 3377 |===================================================================== b . 3389 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: jMonkeyEngine msec < Lower Is Better a . 6806 |===================================================================== b . 6809 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Cassandra msec < Lower Is Better a . 5442 |===================================================================== b . 5473 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Xalan XSLT msec < Lower Is Better a . 469 |====================================================================== b . 461 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Batik SVG Toolkit msec < Lower Is Better a . 1009 |===================================================================== b . 985 |=================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: H2 Database Engine msec < Lower Is Better a . 1721 |===================================================================== b . 1667 |=================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: FOP Print Formatter msec < Lower Is Better a . 407 |====================================================================== b . 382 |================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: PMD Source Code Analyzer msec < Lower Is Better a . 1104 |================================================================= b . 1168 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Lucene Search Index msec < Lower Is Better a . 2526 |=================================================================== b . 2614 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Apache Lucene Search Engine msec < Lower Is Better a . 1223 |=================================================================== b . 1267 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Avrora AVR Simulation Framework msec < Lower Is Better a . 3030 |=================================================================== b . 3100 |===================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: BioJava Biological Data Framework msec < Lower Is Better a . 4376 |===================================================================== b . 4333 |==================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: Zxing 1D/2D Barcode Image Processing msec < Lower Is Better a . 616 |===================================================================== b . 621 |====================================================================== DaCapo Benchmark 23.11 Java Test: H2O In-Memory Platform For Machine Learning msec < Lower Is Better a . 2278 |================================================================== b . 2383 |===================================================================== WebP2 Image Encode 20220823 Encode Settings: Default MP/s > Higher Is Better a . 14.62 |=================================================================== b . 14.82 |==================================================================== WebP2 Image Encode 20220823 Encode Settings: Quality 75, Compression Effort 7 MP/s > Higher Is Better a . 0.35 |===================================================================== b . 0.35 |===================================================================== WebP2 Image Encode 20220823 Encode Settings: Quality 95, Compression Effort 7 MP/s > Higher Is Better a . 0.17 |===================================================================== b . 0.17 |===================================================================== WebP2 Image Encode 20220823 Encode Settings: Quality 100, Compression Effort 5 MP/s > Higher Is Better a . 9.87 |===================================================================== b . 9.79 |==================================================================== WebP2 Image Encode 20220823 Encode Settings: Quality 100, Lossless Compression MP/s > Higher Is Better a . 0.04 |===================================================================== b . 0.04 |===================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer - Model: Crown Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 32.84 |==================================================================== b . 32.67 |==================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer ISPC - Model: Crown Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 33.80 |==================================================================== b . 33.76 |==================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer - Model: Asian Dragon Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 33.18 |==================================================================== b . 32.95 |==================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer - Model: Asian Dragon Obj Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 29.34 |==================================================================== b . 29.23 |==================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer ISPC - Model: Asian Dragon Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 35.10 |==================================================================== b . 34.97 |==================================================================== Embree 4.3 Binary: Pathtracer ISPC - Model: Asian Dragon Obj Frames Per Second > Higher Is Better a . 29.91 |==================================================================== b . 29.86 |==================================================================== Timed FFmpeg Compilation 6.1 Time To Compile Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 22.12 |==================================================================== b . 22.21 |==================================================================== OpenSSL Algorithm: SHA256 byte/s > Higher Is Better a . 36100491030 |============================================================== b . 36172449040 |============================================================== OpenSSL Algorithm: SHA512 byte/s > Higher Is Better a . 11690406590 |============================================================== b . 11681461040 |============================================================== OpenSSL Algorithm: RSA4096 sign/s > Higher Is Better a . 15089.6 |================================================================== b . 15061.3 |================================================================== OpenSSL Algorithm: RSA4096 verify/s > Higher Is Better a . 393292.9 |================================================================= b . 393267.4 |================================================================= OpenSSL Algorithm: ChaCha20 OpenSSL Algorithm: AES-128-GCM OpenSSL Algorithm: AES-256-GCM OpenSSL Algorithm: ChaCha20-Poly1305 PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 1 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 75.01 |================================================================== b . 76.74 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 1 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 30.99 |==================================================================== b . 30.35 |=================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 16 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 50.05 |==================================================================== b . 49.83 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 32 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 50.23 |==================================================================== b . 50.30 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 64 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 50.66 |==================================================================== b . 50.39 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 16 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 20.96 |==================================================================== b . 20.93 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 256 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 50.38 |==================================================================== b . 50.29 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 32 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 20.79 |==================================================================== b . 20.10 |================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 512 - Model: ResNet-50 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 49.51 |=================================================================== b . 50.34 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 64 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 20.46 |=================================================================== b . 20.87 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 256 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 20.90 |==================================================================== b . 20.38 |================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 512 - Model: ResNet-152 batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 20.82 |==================================================================== b . 20.93 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 1 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 16.43 |=================================================================== b . 16.56 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 16 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 12.62 |==================================================================== b . 12.56 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 32 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 12.63 |==================================================================== b . 12.62 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 64 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 12.70 |==================================================================== b . 12.41 |================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 256 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 12.67 |==================================================================== b . 12.63 |==================================================================== PyTorch 2.1 Device: CPU - Batch Size: 512 - Model: Efficientnet_v2_l batches/sec > Higher Is Better a . 12.76 |==================================================================== b . 12.58 |=================================================================== Blender 4.0 Blend File: BMW27 - Compute: CPU-Only Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 51.34 |==================================================================== b . 51.33 |==================================================================== Blender 4.0 Blend File: Classroom - Compute: CPU-Only Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 130.65 |=================================================================== b . 130.74 |=================================================================== Blender 4.0 Blend File: Fishy Cat - Compute: CPU-Only Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 64.18 |==================================================================== b . 64.00 |==================================================================== Blender 4.0 Blend File: Barbershop - Compute: CPU-Only Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 464.43 |=================================================================== b . 463.31 |=================================================================== Blender 4.0 Blend File: Pabellon Barcelona - Compute: CPU-Only Seconds < Lower Is Better a . 158.37 |=================================================================== b . 159.01 |=================================================================== FLAC Audio Encoding 1.4 WAV To FLAC Seconds < Lower Is Better s . 11.68 |==================================================================== LAME MP3 Encoding 3.100 WAV To MP3 Seconds < Lower Is Better s . 4.734 |====================================================================