Rank | User | CPU | Handbrake Version Verified | Total CPU Usage (Hwinfo) | Average Effective Clockspeed (Hwinfo) | seconds | fps/core/GHz (fps per available GHz) | fps | CPU Core | Cores |
1 | XabanakFanatik | 5950X 16/32 | 1.3.3 | 82.4% | 3647 | 129 | 0.241 | 14.05 | Zen 3 (Vermeer) | 16 |
2 | JoeRambo | 10900K | 1.3.3 | 97.2% | 4957 | 235 | 0.155 | 7.69 | Comet Lake (Skylake) | 10 |
3 | EvilRick | Ryzen 7 2700x 8/16 | 1.3.3 | 95.2% | 3910 | 392 | 0.147 | 4.61 | Zen+ (Summit Ridge) | 8 |
4 | Hulk | 4770K 4/8 | 1.3.3 | 98.1% | 3620 | 815 | 0.153 | 2.22 | Haswell | 4 |
5 | Hulk | 8250u 4/8 (Surface 2 laptop) | 1.3.3 | 98.3% | 2400 | 1065 | 0.177 | 1.70 | Kaby Lake R (Skylake) | 4 |
Zen 3 - What?!
Here's my results on Linux (Ubuntu 20.10). I used turbostat to get CPU utilization and frequency since HWinfo is Windows only.
encoded 1806 frames in 379.67s (4.77 fps), 10567.33 kb/s, Avg QP:28.58
AMD 2700 (8c/16t) @ 4.25 GHz
Handbrake 1.3.3
DDR4@ 3200 MHz, tuned RAM timings.
3970 MHz average frequency
90.6% average utilization
Edit: Also, @Hulk , you should probably edit the first post in the thread as new people may read the first post and then add their results without getting the updated info.
Edit2: Sorry, just noticed the OP is @ElFenix. Maybe we should just start a new thread?
I'm not even getting started yet..... 4.4 is just a temporary low power overclock because I'm using a U12A. The Optimus AM4 block is on the way
Based on the voltages I'm able to run 4.6 ghz for short term testing I wouldn't be surprised if 4.7-4.8 all core will be doable on water. I'm 100% thermally bound at the moment.
Of note in the Zen3 bench result is the low CPU usage. If my guess is correct, in this one test, the core is do efficient that it's outstripping the memory subsystem's ability to keep it fed with data, and even with SMT, it's still spending a good bit of time just waiting for more data.
Perhaps more of a memory overclock?
Of note in the Zen3 bench result is the low CPU usage. If my guess is correct, in this one test, the core is do efficient that it's outstripping the memory subsystem's ability to keep it fed with data, and even with SMT, it's still spending a good bit of time just waiting for more data.
Perhaps more of a memory overclock?
If that were the case, shouldn't turning off SMT help higher cores CPUs? After all if scaling is getting worse with a higher thread count, the threads getting whole cores might start to outweigh the numerical advantage of more threads sharing cores through SMT. Anybody with a 3950X or 5950X willing to test for this hypothesis?I have a feeling it's Handbrake's inability to continue linearly scaling with more cores. 10 cores is scaling pretty well but there is obviously a drop off to 16. We'll know more when we get some 12/14 core results. From what I've seen in the past most video operations require lots of compute, not so much memory bandwidth. It's interesting. We'll see.
If that were the case, shouldn't turning off SMT help higher cores CPUs? After all if scaling is getting worse with a higher thread count, the threads getting whole cores might start to outweigh the numerical advantage of more threads sharing cores through SMT. Anybody with a 3950X or 5950X willing to test for this hypothesis?
Here's my 3900x @ per CCX OC (4350, 4350, 4300, 4300, 1.25v) with the new rules.
Had to drop clocks down a bit from my last entry (4375, 4375, 4325, 4300) as this is now hitting 90°C and handbrake was crashing. Thanks early summer and your ~30°C ambient temperatures! My air cooler hates you
--------------------------
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12-Core Processor
RAM: 4x16GB DDR4-3800 16-20-16-38 (tuned secondaries + teritiares), fclk 1900MHz
encoded 1806 frames in 191.07s (9.45 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
Hwinfo runtime: 3m 10s (~190s)
Average effective clockspeed: 3488MHz
Total CPU usage (average): 80.2%
Can you tell us your average effective clock and CPU usage percentage from HWinfo please?
Click the linked text. There's all the relevant hwinfo data you need.
go right on ahead, OP is now a mess trying to put the new info into it.I would like to start a new thread but I won't do it without the OP's permission.
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor @ default 4224 MHz Average.
Ram: 16309 MB, (3800_C14)
encoded 1806 frames in 172.38s (10.48 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
I'll try again with PBO enabled and update.
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor with PBO 4427 MHz Average
Ram: 16309 MB, (3800_C14)
encoded 1806 frames in 163.07s (11.07 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
Usage fluctuated between 94-99%
go right on ahead, OP is now a mess trying to put the new info into it.
it's kinda weird that i didn't get @Hitman928 's summon.
This seems to support my theory. We're at 75% of the threads with similar clocks and memory throughput and we have a much higher usage percentage. It still doesn't rule out some sort of algorithm or thread sharing limitation on scaling.HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor @ default 4224 MHz Average.
Ram: 16309 MB, (3800_C14)
encoded 1806 frames in 172.38s (10.48 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
I'll try again with PBO enabled and update.
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor with PBO 4427 MHz Average
Ram: 16309 MB, (3800_C14)
encoded 1806 frames in 163.07s (11.07 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09
Usage fluctuated between 94-99%
HandBrake 1.3.3 (2020061300)
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3500X 6-Core Processor
Ram: 32721 MB,
GPU Information:
Radeon (TM) RX 480 Graphics - 27.20.14501.24001
encoded 1806 frames in 480.11s (3.76 fps), 11820.04 kb/s, Avg QP:29.09