SPECworkstation 3

The best place to start for performance is to confirm that this system does get the best SPECworkstation 3 score ever. For users who have never heard of SPECworkstation, it comes from the same people that have the SPEC benchmark that we often use on new processors. The workstation element comes in because this set of benchmarks are designed to test a number of common workstation workloads, such as 3D rendering and animation, molecular modeling and dynamics, medical, oil and gas, construction and architecture, financial services, general operations, and GPU compute. This benchmark combine 30 workloads and ~140 tests into a single package, and results are given as a multiple of a performance compared to a ‘reference’ machine using an Intel Quad-core Skylake processor running a W3100 AMD GPU. This means that this quad-core Intel system gets a value of ‘1’.

SPECworkstation 3 Test Systems
AnandTech CPU GPU DRAM SSD Price
Fujistu Celsius R970 2 x Xeon 8276 RTX 8000 DDR4-2933 PCIe 3.0 $30000+
Armari Magnetar X64T TR3 3990X RTX 6000 DDR4-3200 PCIe 4.0 ~$14200
TR3 3990X 'Stock' TR3 3990X 2080 super DDR4-3200 SATA -
W-3175X 'Stock' Xeon W-3175X 2080 Ti DDR4-2933 SATA -

The current system at the top of the official SPECworkstation 3 standings is a Fujitsu Celsius R970 workstation (D3488-A2). This is the system that Armari has beaten with the X64T. The Fujitsu uses two Intel Xeon Platinum 8276 processors (28-core each, total 56-corepaired with an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and 384 GB of DDR4-2933. This system, going on list prices for just these components, already comes to $24538. Add in the rest, and some overhead, and this is easily $30000+. By comparison, Armari’s Magnetar X64T workstation is only ~$14200.

The results are as follows. Here we are comparing the Fujitsu official results to Armari’s official results. We also have included our results with the same system (technically classified as ‘estimated results’ because these haven’t been formally submitted to the results database), and a W-3175X system with an RTX 2080 Ti and PCIe 3.0 SSD.

SPECworkstation 3 Results
AnandTech Fujitsu
+ 2080
2080 Ti
Media and Entertainment 4.72 7.04 6.84 4.79 3.69
Product Development 6.07 10.85 9.95 3.51 3.35
Life Sciences 5.89 8.24 8.11 - 3.72
Financial Services 8.78 10.55 10.45 9.15 6.59
Energy 5.44 9.09 8.73 4.20 2.86
General Operations 2.27 2.53 2.45 1.55 1.59
GPU Compute 5.40 5.75 5.70 4.63 5.01
Geomean 5.17 7.06 6.84 4.08 3.54

*As submitted to SPEC

Within each of these segments, 7-20 sub-tests are performed covering CPU, GPU, and Storage workloads. Our results were a little lower than Armari's, however that can be down to tuning, ambient temperatures, and repeated runs. Our run was within 3%.

Overall, the Magnetar X64T results beat the old Fujitsu results by 37%:

  • CPU: Armari wins by +46%
  • GPU: Armari wins by +12%
  • Storage: Armari wins by +58%

Now, users might wonder how the Armari wins in the GPU tests, given that it has an RTX 6000 compared to the RTX 8000 in the Fujitsu. This is namely down to processor performance – the Fujitsu system processors have a base frequency of 2200 MHz, compared to the Magnetar X64T which can run all processors at 3925 MHz. Even if the Fujitsu was using the CPU in single core mode, and hitting its max turbo of 4000 MHz, the Armari would be using the better IPC of the Zen 2 core against Intel’s Skylake core.

Now each of the above tests are combined scores from sub-tests.

The Intel-based Fujitsu system does have some specific wins in individual tests, such as Maya Storage (+15%), NAMD Storage (+12%) and 7-zip CPU (+75%), however these mostly apply due to the increased memory capacity of the Intel machine.

The AMD-based Armari system has 40 other wins, including Blender CPU (+62%), handbrake CPU (+86%), CFD CPU (+108%), NAMD CPU (+164%), Seismic Data Processing (+230%), LAAMPS storage (+88%), and Creo GPU (+55%).

Full data for the Armari and the Fujitsu systems can be found at these links:

The Armari Magnetar X64T Workstation Rendering Benchmark Performance


View All Comments

  • MrVibrato - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    No shit sherlock! Wanna mate? Reply
  • Spunjji - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Are you being paid to leave multiple jackass comments or is it just a hobby? Reply
  • MrVibrato - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Both! Reply
  • timecop1818 - Wednesday, September 9, 2020 - link

    Thought it was gonna be some ARM workstation based on the name, stopped reading after first few paragraphs.

    what sorta business would be buying a stupid overclocked amd "workstation", these things need to be stable, not some bullshit kiddie water cooled omg l33t crap lol. oh wait, it's amd, stable is already not gonna happen OC or not.
  • Ian Cutress - Wednesday, September 9, 2020 - link

    High demand from UK VFX industry. Reply
  • RSAUser - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    Interesting that it is stable then...

    You need to go and look up what overclocking actually is.
  • Spunjji - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    You could at least read the article and a couple of other comments before you comment, timecrap.

    But no. Make a bunch of assumptions, chuck in some fanboy bullshit for good measure and high-five yourself on the way out. What a dick.
  • Spunjji - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Relevant section:

    "On stability, throughout all of our testing, there was nothing to mention - there wasn't a single hint of instability. On speaking with Armari, the company said that this is down to AMD's own internal DVFS when implementing a high level PBO-based overclock: I was told that because this system was built from the ground up to accommodate this power, along with the custom tweaks, and the fact that AMD's voltage and frequency tracking metrics always ensured a stable system (as long as the temperature and BIOS is managed), then they can build 10, 20, or 50 systems in a row and not experience any issues."
  • realbabilu - Wednesday, September 9, 2020 - link

    Just raise a question : how about running clustered ryzen 3900x against this one Reply
  • eonsim - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    It would be useful to see some bioinformatic style sequencing benchmarks in the science section. A very common usecase in life sciences is to take fastq sequence data for an individual align it to a reference genome using BWA MEM, and then identify variant regions using software like freebayes, GATK or BCFtools. Or alternatively take raw sequence data and de novo assemble that data into a new genome using software like CANU. For reasonable sized research projects these sorts of jobs these sorts of jobs can take 10's-100's of thousands of compute hours. For some of the large collaborations they can take millions of CPU hours, and petabytes of this data is getting generated during the course of a year. In certain cases like cancer-care or infectious diseases these processes can be time critical, and thus there can be significant benefits to using a machine that can trim a few percentage points off. Finally a lot of these jobs scale close to linearly with core count. Happy to discuss how a realist test case could be set up. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now