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

  • Ian Cutress - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    For my automated test suite, there are usually some limitations: requiring Windows (or WSL) and a non-expert guide are usually the top two :)

    If you have a suggestion for a benchmark, please drop me a line at ian@anandtech.com
  • eonsim - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Will do, should be doable on WSL with reasonable performance. Reply
  • tygrus - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    Are there power consumption results for the other systems? Compare with AMD @stock and @OC doing same workloads. How do they compare when using same average power?
    The higher room ambient temperature may limit performance.
  • Hifihedgehog - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    > "something the larger VFX houses have requested en masse"

    Hey Ian! Are you privy to which VFX houses are among these purchasers? Are these the household names like Pixar and ILM?
  • Whiteknight2020 - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    "who are these VFX houses?"
    How about:
    The Moving Picture Company
    Double Negative
    Soho VFX

    Etc, all world leading and Oscar winning VFX houses.
  • Hifihedgehog - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Thanks, @Whiteknight2020 Reply
  • Whiteknight2020 - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    "who are these VFX houses?"
    How about:
    The Moving Picture Company
    Double Negative
    Soho VFX

    Etc, all world leading and Oscar winning VFX houses.
  • SanX - Thursday, September 10, 2020 - link

    Suspicion exists that your particle movement test is purely artificial BS, you confuse the community with its results for two years now. It is not a sole representative of any whole real model, so it is abstract like am assumption of some spherical horse in the vacuum.

    What was done inside your code by Intel engineer no one knows including yourself. Two years passed and not a single person confirmed 5x lead in performance of Intel over AMD in any their real codes applying AVX512. This option in our 3D PIC models for example never got us more than 15-20% improvement which in supercomputing world is literally nothing. Codes do not consist of one single operation which Intel succeeded to speed up.
  • Spunjji - Friday, September 11, 2020 - link

    Despite being far from an expert on this, I'm fairly certain that a 15-20% performance gain is *huge* in the supercomputing world where time on the system costs stupendous amounts of money. Reply
  • SanX - Saturday, September 12, 2020 - link

    "Despite being far from an expert on this, I'm fairly certain that a 15-20% performance gain is *huge*..."
    Besides being far from expert, you are also far from common sense. If 15-20% were huge the customers would upgrade their supercomputers as soon as they get those 15-20% boost while they typically upgrade when they are almost an order of magnitude larger.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now