Single Thread Score rating

[DwaSokoly]

Hi,

We released a new version of PerformanceTest a few days ago, version 10.
Improvements in the benchmark test algorithms & using a more modern compiler resulted the single threaded test performing a much higher number of operations per second. These changes should push the CPU harder and use modern CPU features (out of order execution and multiple pipelines) better. The result was roughly 3x times more operations per second being performed, compared to PerformanceTest V9.

Yesterday we started to switch over the graphs on the web site to start to use results from PerformanceTest V10. This accounts for the change in the results in the graphs.

However in hindsight we think have done the wrong thing. We should had scaled down the PT10 single threaded result to match the PT9 results for the single threaded test. This single threaded test was already an average of values from several different single threaded algorithms. So additional scaling wouldn’t have changed the significance of the value.

On Monday (9th March 2020) we plan to patch the version 10 release to scale the single threaded value back to the PT9 results. Things should then be back to normal. In the meantime we have reverted the single threaded graph on the web site to use only PT9 results.

As we collect more PT10 results we expect PT10 to perform better on modern CPUs compared to older ones (relative to PT9). So overtime there might be a spreading out of the single threaded results, with the newer hardware pulling away from the older hardware a bit more.

Sorry for any confusion all this has caused.

More info:
See also this post for some additional details
https://www.passmark.com/forum/pc-ha...s-huge-changes

Mr.David,
in my opinion there is another issue with Multithread Scores.

Good thing is that there are better scores for multi-cores processors but something happened with ALL AMD processors older than Zen core. These scores are (in average) lower by 33% than previous. It could be even possible if the previous algorithm was inproper but there are some very suspicious records - especially if you are compare 2 cores or 1 core CPU scores. My examples (but there are much more on the site) from my observations:

AMD Athlon X2 370K Dual Core: previous single thread score: 1461, actual single thread score: 1461, previous multithread score: 2251, actual multithread score: 1463 = 65% of previous score - it's worth to mention that it's the same score as single thread figure - looks like algorithms didn't use 2 cores....

AMD Opteron 150 Single Core: previous single thread score: 725, actual single thread score: 725, previous multithread score: 604, actual multithread score: 393 = 65% of previous score - in this case multithread score is on the level of 54% of single thread....

I could be wrong but for me it's some error in algorithm for all AMD older processors which declines the scores about 33%.

Best Regards,
Darek

[proboszcz]

Does PassMark v10 uses IS SHA Extensions when available when testing? Those instructions are supported by almost all cryptographic libraries for SHA1 and SHA256 hashes but are present only in AMD Zen based processors and only in a very small amount of Intel Based processors.
If it is not then addition of AVX512 is a clear favor of only Intel based processors for the benchmark...

The results for single thread, like others pointed out, are now a clear favor of Intel only processors. Other benchmarks, like Cinebench R20 clearly shows that AMD Zen 2 base processors have a lead in IPC over the Intel in Single Thread. But now from PassMark v10 we do not see that. Why these changes to the benchmark favors only one vendor? This is suspicious in the same way the UserBenchmark just after Zen2 launch changed their benchmark point calculations to favor only one vendor - Intel of course.

Why such things happen and why always Intel is being favored? Why benchmarks must be altered when AMD launches new architecture and when Intel does so, there is no such need?

[dylandog]

Next there is the question of should both the 2000 and 3000 series be higher up the new PT10 single thread rankings (i.e. above the best Intel CPUs)?
There is no right answer for this as performance really depends on the particular application you are running. The best Intel and AMD CPUs are close enough at the moment that you can make a case either to be faster based on the applications you choose to run.

Looking at the current results today we have.
(These will change slightly over the coming weeks however)

Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz
PT10 Single threaded result: 2812

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
PT10 Single threaded result: 2182 (22% slower)

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
PT10 Single threaded result: 2142 (23% slower).

How does this compare to real life? Here is a result from Tom's Hardware running the POV-RAY application, single threaded.



So for this real life app we see the following
(remember lower score are better for this POV rendering test)

Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz
POV-Ray result: 505

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
POV-Ray result: 633 (25% slower)

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
POV-Ray result: 636 (26% slower)

So these results line up pretty well with PT10.

Cinebench (single threaded) gives results of 16% and 18%.
Y-Cruncher (single threaded) gives results of 88% and 95% (big difference is due to AVX instructions in Intel's CPU)

So if we accept that the Ryzen 3000 series gives +13% performance over the 2000 series, then that still puts them around 10 to 15% behind the best Intel CPUs.

I am sure it is possible cheery pick counter examples, but hopefully the majority of people will see the new results as an improvement over what we had.

This doesn't totally address everything however. We still have a problem presenting results for which we have zero PT10 samples (the rare and old CPUs). We are looking at that problem at the moment. Hopefully we'll have a reasonable solution in the next couple of days and get those rare units into their correct rankings.

And after cpu-z, usebenchmark now also passmark nerf ryzen performance...and David you can see on HwGeek comment that fast POV-RAY single thread cpu is ryzen 3950x next time choose POV-RAY result with ryzen 3000....

[BenchmarkManiac]

Take a look at Cinebench standings for example. In their single core test Threadripers do not outperform boosted 3950X. In multicore test 9900KS is indeed faster than the 3800X. The results looks consistent and predictable.

[gruffi]

All your explanation of how Zen 2 is worse than Intel just can't explain why they are still better multithreaded. 9900KS just can't perform worse than 3800X then. It is boosted to 5 GHz all cores and has the same number of cores. If it is 20% faster in ST it should just rip 3800X to shreds multithreaded. So why it lose to 3800X in multithreaded test then?

First of all, the i9-9900KS shouldn't be 20% ahead of Ryzen 7 3800X single core. Zen 2 has a little IPC advantage over Coffee Lake. While the i9-9900KS has a single core boost advantage of ~11% over the Ryzen 7 3800X. So, in fact the difference between both should be under 10% single core. Multithreaded is another story. It also depends on SMT. I don't known the current situation. But when the first Zen was released it showed better SMT scaling than Skylake. Zen 2 shouldn't be worse. And Coffee Lake basically still is Skylake. So, I would expect AMD to improve in multithreaded scenarios compared to single thread.

[gruffi]

So from the results above it seems in V9 we claimed new generation 3000 series was 40% faster for single threaded. Clearly this wasn't very reflective of real life. The 3000 series wasn't 40% faster, except maybe in a few edge cases. Now with V10 results we are claiming the 3000 series is 13% faster than the 2000 series. Which seems a much more plausible number and more reflective of real life applications. So I think from that point of view the new results are an definite improvement

Hi David,

first of all let me say I appreciate your efforts to update the CPU benchmark to better reflect today's software infrastructures. I work as software developer for a hardware company and we use PassMark as a quick comparison of CPUs. But I feel version 10 isn't very useful to us. I know that such heavy changes are not easy and cause a lot of fuss you have to deal with. So, I really hope you carefully listen to the community to improve the new version.

I don't know what's going on but something definitely isn't working as it should. And don't get me wrong, I'm not interested in any AMD vs Intel discussions. I just care about the differences between CPUs and that it should be plausible. Which isn't the case with the new version.

Let me give you an example, I own a Ryzen 5 1600 and recently upgraded to the Ryzen 5 3600. Nothing else changed on my system. Except the memory now can run at 3200 instead of 2666. I did some quick benchmarks (CPU-Z, Fritz Chess, Linpack, etc) and saw an improvement of 30-35% core for core. This is absolutely in line with the specs (up to 16-17% more boost clocks) and what AMD claimed for the Zen 2 architecture (+15% IPC). And this is also confirmed by many single core tests you can find on the Internet. Some show even improvements of about 40%.

Now let's have a look at your v10 single thread numbers:

AMD Ryzen 5 1600: 1934
AMD Ryzen 5 3600: 2370

This is an advantage of just 22-23% for the Ryzen 3600. So no, I cannot agree with you. At the moment the new version isn't more reflective of real life applications.

Let's look back at the v9 single thread numbers:

AMD Ryzen 5 1600: 1822
AMD Ryzen 5 3600: 2804

This is an advantage of almost 54% for the Ryzen 3600. This of course isn't very reflective of real life applications as well. The question is, was the Ryzen 5 1600 rated too low or the Ryzen 5 3600 too high before? Probably people do not care much about if newer hardware is shown in a better light than it should. But they care if newer hardware "mysteriously" lose some teeth for no apparent reason.

Anyway, something between v9 and v10 scores would be the most reflective solution in my opinion. For the moment the comparison chart doesn't look very reliable to me. And I don't feel it will change that much with more submitted results. It needs more changes.

[DarkDepths]

Ok. Now with more sample data there is no weird spikes among AMD CPU. The fact that ThreadReapers perform better than the boosted to bigger frequency 3950X... one can claim that this is due to better thermal design of threadreapers and the test is slow and very tough. etc etc.

All your explanation of how Zen 2 is worse than Intel just can't explain why they are still better multithreaded. 9900KS just can't perform worse than 3800X then. It is boosted to 5 GHz all cores and has the same number of cores. If it is 20% faster in ST it should just rip 3800X to shreds multithreaded. So why it lose to 3800X in multithreaded test then?

It looks like Zen cpus have much better SMT and multi-core scaling than Intel's, which isn't new if you check other threaded apps. So a 8 core 16 threads 3800 has around 9x score scaling from the single thread value meanwhile 9900K with the same core amount sits at 6.7x.
Both aren't scoring 8x as the linear core count suggest, but a bit above or below as the underling architecture shares resources or not.

For example one thread on that Intel processor can access all the L3 so that explains the better score than even other Intel's 5GHz CPUs (8086k with 2800 points).
Each Zen2 core can access half the L3 on die, with higher latency too, but that means with more cores under work it scales better as there are more resources left available: it's made for server workloads and scales very well accordingly.

With that said the 20% difference in single thread is somewhat misleading as most high end AMD processors today are much closer to Intel's on many benches as other have pointed out. Maybe it would be better to point out what individual sub-test favour each architecture?

[BenchmarkManiac]

Ok. Now with more sample data there is no weird spikes among AMD CPU. The fact that ThreadReapers perform better than the boosted to bigger frequency 3950X... one can claim that this is due to better thermal design of threadreapers and the test is slow and very tough. etc etc.

All your explanation of how Zen 2 is worse than Intel just can't explain why they are still better multithreaded. 9900KS just can't perform worse than 3800X then. It is boosted to 5 GHz all cores and has the same number of cores. If it is 20% faster in ST it should just rip 3800X to shreds multithreaded. So why it lose to 3800X in multithreaded test then?

[Klozzie]

Perhaps a difference in L3 cache size could explain why the Zen 2 cpus are performing so poorly compared to their normal performance? The 4300u is far ahead of their desktop counterparts which makes no sense given the reduction in clock speed, and the main differentiator is a reduction in L3 cache per core(4x reduction). I don't know what would cause that in your suite but you might be able to figure it out.

[HwGeek]

Dear David,
As you see the problem Zen 2.0 scores, even if you compare the bench from TH, the Zen 2.0 ST performance is better then Coffee Lake and only the 5Ghz 9900K/S can match it.
on AVG the 9900K and Ryzen 3900X/3950X should be in ~5% margin, not ~20% like the PT10 ST scores show.
Here same Pov-Ray benchmark:

Best Regards,
HwGeek.

[David (PassMark)]

Next there is the question of should both the 2000 and 3000 series be higher up the new PT10 single thread rankings (i.e. above the best Intel CPUs)?
There is no right answer for this as performance really depends on the particular application you are running. The best Intel and AMD CPUs are close enough at the moment that you can make a case either to be faster based on the applications you choose to run.

Looking at the current results today we have.
(These will change slightly over the coming weeks however)

Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz
PT10 Single threaded result: 2812

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
PT10 Single threaded result: 2182 (22% slower)

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
PT10 Single threaded result: 2142 (23% slower).

How does this compare to real life? Here is a result from Tom's Hardware running the POV-RAY application, single threaded.



So for this real life app we see the following
(remember lower score are better for this POV rendering test)

Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz
POV-Ray result: 505

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
POV-Ray result: 633 (25% slower)

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
POV-Ray result: 636 (26% slower)

So these results line up pretty well with PT10.

Cinebench (single threaded) gives results of 16% and 18%.
Y-Cruncher (single threaded) gives results of 88% and 95% (big difference is due to AVX instructions in Intel's CPU)

So if we accept that the Ryzen 3000 series gives +13% performance over the 2000 series, then that still puts them around 10 to 15% behind the best Intel CPUs.

I am sure it is possible cheery pick counter examples, but hopefully the majority of people will see the new results as an improvement over what we had.

This doesn't totally address everything however. We still have a problem presenting results for which we have zero PT10 samples (the rare and old CPUs). We are looking at that problem at the moment. Hopefully we'll have a reasonable solution in the next couple of days and get those rare units into their correct rankings.

[David (PassMark)]

So we've been doing some analysis overnight for the single threaded data. There is too much data to post it all. But here are a sub-set of the results to date for which we have a reasonable amount of confidence in (i.e. at least 3 samples to average).

CPU Model	PT9 Single thread result	Rank	PT10 Single thread result	Change in result
AMD Phenom II X4 965	1181.35	1371	1340.51	13%
Intel Core i7-8665U @ 1.90GHz	2314.40	147	2583.77	12%
AMD Athlon II X4 640	1024.19	1609	1141.63	11%
Intel Core i5-5200U @ 2.20GHz	1397.26	1107	1554.38	11%
Intel Core i5-760 @ 2.80GHz	1208.25	1336	1342.25	11%
Intel Core i3-380M @ 2.53GHz	970.04	1689	1075.29	11%
Intel Core i5-6300U @ 2.40GHz	1621.80	828	1795.17	11%
AMD Ryzen 5 3500U	1789.47	624	1976.34	10%
AMD Phenom II X4 955	1106.72	1487	1222.11	10%
Intel Core i5-6400 @ 2.70GHz	1824.15	588	2007.49	10%
Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.60GHz	1802.63	611	1983.24	10%
Intel Core i5-7500T @ 2.70GHz	1855.82	560	2035.97	10%
Intel Core i7-6700 @ 3.40GHz	2154.55	248	2359.56	10%
Intel Core i7-5500U @ 2.40GHz	1545.55	929	1692.56	10%
Intel Core i7-6850K @ 3.60GHz	2191.78	214	2396.56	9%
Intel Core i5-5300U @ 2.30GHz	1533.89	946	1675.67	9%
Intel Core i7-6820HQ @ 2.70GHz	1873.25	534	2042.19	9%
Intel Core i7-860 @ 2.80GHz	1235.95	1305	1344.16	9%
Intel Core i5-6600K @ 3.50GHz	2145.68	255	2331.76	9%
Intel Core i5-560M @ 2.67GHz	1197.88	1353	1295.96	8%
Intel Core i7-7820HQ @ 2.90GHz	2048.52	348	2213.16	8%
Intel Core i3-5005U @ 2.00GHz	1091.94	1506	1179.06	8%
Intel Core i5-6600 @ 3.30GHz	2095.22	306	2262.03	8%
Intel Core i5-3337U @ 1.80GHz	1273.20	1257	1371.22	8%
Intel Core i3-6100U @ 2.30GHz	1300.80	1227	1400.28	8%
Intel Core i3-6006U @ 2.00GHz	1115.06	1464	1199.06	8%
Intel Core i5-6300HQ @ 2.30GHz	1672.59	765	1797.34	7%
Intel Core i7-640M @ 2.80GHz	1303.26	1223	1400.13	7%
Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz	2354.04	128	2520.93	7%
Intel Core i5-6500 @ 3.20GHz	1948.45	447	2082.33	7%
Intel Core i3-8100 @ 3.60GHz	2097.86	301	2241.16	7%
Intel Core i5-7400 @ 3.00GHz	1944.59	455	2076.19	7%
AMD Ryzen 5 1600	1822.45	592	1945.76	7%
Intel Core i5-7500 @ 3.40GHz	2115.63	287	2258.53	7%
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H	1942.35	459	2072.64	7%
AMD Ryzen 5 3400G	2097.71	302	2238.38	7%
Intel Core i5-520M @ 2.40GHz	1061.55	1552	1130.27	6%
AMD Ryzen 3 1200	1719.31	710	1830.36	6%
AMD FX-6100 Six-Core	1187.51	1365	1262.08	6%
Intel Core i7-6700HQ @ 2.60GHz	1797.65	616	1909.61	6%
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X	2142.95	258	2274.71	6%
Intel Core i7-7700HQ @ 2.80GHz	1990.52	402	2110.86	6%
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G	1946.99	451	2064.53	6%
Intel Core i5-7300U @ 2.60GHz	1948.33	449	2064.71	6%
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G	1992.72	400	2109.53	6%
Intel Core i3-9100F @ 3.60GHz	2404.91	107	2544.95	6%
Intel Core i5-8265U @ 1.60GHz	2127.93	275	2249.29	6%
Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.20GHz	2580.67	61	2726.71	6%
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G	1845.73	567	1946.68	5%
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X	1964.37	434	2070.49	5%
Intel Core i7-3610QM @ 2.30GHz	1637.90	815	1725.28	5%
Intel Core i9-7900X @ 3.30GHz	2447.39	96	2576.62	5%
Intel Core i7-7700 @ 3.60GHz	2342.44	135	2466.00	5%
Intel Core i7-4510U @ 2.00GHz	1628.77	825	1714.03	5%
Intel Core i7-3520M @ 2.90GHz	1783.73	630	1875.24	5%
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U	1668.35	770	1750.02	5%
Intel Core i5-4300U @ 1.90GHz	1562.86	907	1639.30	5%
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X	2182.17	219	2286.22	5%
Intel Core i5-1035G4 @ 1.10GHz	2406.59	106	2518.03	5%
Intel Core i5-4200U @ 1.60GHz	1370.08	1147	1431.74	5%
Intel Core i3-550 @ 3.20GHz	1299.71	1228	1355.69	4%
AMD Ryzen 5 2600	2004.09	386	2089.57	4%
Intel Core i7-9750HF @ 2.60GHz	2467.68	88	2571.24	4%
Intel Core i5-9500 @ 3.00GHz	2546.64	66	2652.32	4%
Intel Pentium Gold G5400 @ 3.70GHz	2172.79	229	2260.79	4%
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X	1886.50	524	1962.49	4%
Intel Core i7-5600U @ 2.60GHz	1662.18	774	1727.80	4%
Intel Core i3-540 @ 3.07GHz	1223.15	1317	1270.81	4%
Intel Core i5-9600K @ 3.70GHz	2678.09	39	2782.13	4%
Intel Core i7-930 @ 2.80GHz	1219.50	1322	1265.09	4%
Intel Core i7-8750H @ 2.20GHz	2340.88	136	2427.69	4%
Intel Core i5-3230M @ 2.60GHz	1576.45	889	1633.75	4%
Intel Core i3-4030U @ 1.90GHz	1042.44	1581	1079.90	4%
Intel Core i9-9900 @ 3.10GHz	2794.83	20	2894.59	4%
Intel Core i3-7100 @ 3.90GHz	2225.94	195	2305.24	4%
AMD Ryzen 7 2700	1982.52	413	2051.47	3%
Intel Core i7-950 @ 3.07GHz	1327.62	1194	1373.21	3%
Intel Core i7-9850H @ 2.60GHz	2520.77	74	2607.13	3%
Intel Core i9-9900KF @ 3.60GHz	2884.94	15	2982.94	3%
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X	1970.36	428	2036.96	3%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X	1989.92	403	2056.77	3%
Intel Core i5-8259U @ 2.30GHz	2211.32	200	2284.83	3%
Intel Core i7-8565U @ 1.80GHz	2298.25	152	2370.67	3%
Intel Core i7-9750H @ 2.60GHz	2464.16	91	2541.00	3%
Intel Xeon W-2123 @ 3.60GHz	2144.54	256	2211.07	3%
Intel Core i7-3630QM @ 2.40GHz	1685.18	750	1736.71	3%
AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core	1510.00	976	1555.06	3%
Intel Core i5-8600K @ 3.60GHz	2511.37	78	2583.85	3%
Intel Core i5-3317U @ 1.70GHz	1215.03	1327	1249.35	3%
Intel Core i7-9700 @ 3.00GHz	2690.32	36	2765.66	3%
AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 3500U	1895.68	513	1947.82	3%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X	2207.52	204	2267.97	3%
Intel Core i7-3820QM @ 2.70GHz	1844.09	569	1892.53	3%
Intel Core i5-4210U @ 1.70GHz	1430.46	1066	1467.60	3%
Intel Core i7-4720HQ @ 2.60GHz	1909.52	496	1955.94	2%
AMD FX-8370 Eight-Core	1537.08	942	1574.40	2%
Intel Core i7-9700KF @ 3.60GHz	2793.28	21	2860.89	2%
Intel Core i7-8700 @ 3.20GHz	2624.50	50	2686.85	2%
Intel Core i7-6500U @ 2.50GHz	1640.39	813	1679.28	2%
Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz	2888.73	14	2954.55	2%
Intel Core i7-8700K @ 3.70GHz	2696.43	34	2757.30	2%
Intel Pentium 5405U @ 2.30GHz	1331.05	1192	1360.39	2%
Intel Core i5-9600KF @ 3.70GHz	2659.62	42	2717.87	2%
Intel Core i5-9400F @ 2.90GHz	2392.99	112	2444.80	2%
Intel Core i5-10210U @ 1.60GHz	2300.07	150	2348.15	2%
Intel Core i5-9300H @ 2.40GHz	2348.32	131	2395.21	2%
Intel Core i7-9700K @ 3.60GHz	2812.37	18	2867.92	2%
AMD FX-9590 Eight-Core	1724.58	701	1758.15	2%
AMD FX-6300 Six-Core	1406.96	1089	1434.16	2%
Intel Core i9-9900KS @ 4.00GHz	2992.34	3	3048.18	2%
Intel Core i5-7300HQ @ 2.50GHz	1856.87	558	1888.02	2%
Intel Core i5-750 @ 2.67GHz	1145.91	1414	1164.15	2%
AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700U	1902.95	501	1931.20	1%
Intel Core i3-8130U @ 2.20GHz	1917.02	488	1944.24	1%
Intel Core i7-8650U @ 1.90GHz	2208.18	202	2238.56	1%
Intel Core i7-10510U @ 1.80GHz	2430.48	103	2460.29	1%
Intel Xeon E5450 @ 3.00GHz	1265.42	1271	1279.92	1%
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H	1872.30	536	1892.85	1%
Intel Core i7-10710U @ 1.10GHz	2384.66	116	2410.09	1%
Intel Core i5-8250U @ 1.60GHz	1923.42	480	1940.38	1%
Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2 @ 3.30GHz	1950.26	445	1964.10	1%
Intel Xeon E-2274G @ 4.00GHz	2727.63	30	2744.80	1%
Intel Core i5-8400T @ 1.70GHz	1921.59	484	1929.41	0%
Intel Core i5-3570 @ 3.40GHz	2022.68	370	2023.00	0%
Intel Xeon E3-1240 V2 @ 3.40GHz	2027.48	365	2023.83	0%
Intel Core i5-8500 @ 3.00GHz	2404.57	108	2399.51	0%
Intel Xeon E5-2667 v2 @ 3.30GHz	2010.74	378	2006.42	0%
Intel Core i5-3330 @ 3.00GHz	1700.04	732	1695.70	0%
Intel Core i5-3320M @ 2.60GHz	1642.32	811	1637.91	0%
Intel Core2 Quad Q9400 @ 2.66GHz	1127.68	1439	1121.53	-1%
Intel Core i7-3770S @ 3.10GHz	2025.78	367	2012.00	-1%
Intel Core i5-3360M @ 2.80GHz	1763.13	652	1746.45	-1%
Intel Core i5-8400 @ 2.80GHz	2330.63	143	2305.94	-1%
Intel Core i7-1065G7 @ 1.30GHz	2518.80	75	2486.49	-1%
Intel Core i5-3470 @ 3.20GHz	1916.03	490	1887.81	-1%
Intel Core2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz	993.35	1652	978.12	-2%
Intel Core i5-1035G1 @ 1.00GHz	2329.60	144	2292.83	-2%
Intel Core i5-8300H @ 2.30GHz	2294.68	153	2254.58	-2%
Intel Core i3-4150 @ 3.50GHz	2009.46	380	1974.18	-2%
Intel Core i5-4690K @ 3.50GHz	2235.34	186	2195.31	-2%
AMD Ryzen 7 1700	1781.15	634	1747.56	-2%
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 3.50GHz	2103.31	293	2059.42	-2%
AMD FX-6350 Six-Core	1484.41	1013	1453.05	-2%
Intel Core i7-2670QM @ 2.20GHz	1394.20	1112	1362.97	-2%
Intel Core i3-4130 @ 3.40GHz	1958.37	441	1911.68	-2%
Intel Core i5-4670K @ 3.40GHz	2186.87	217	2133.26	-2%
Intel Core i5-4570 @ 3.20GHz	2057.24	343	2004.23	-3%
Intel Core i5-3570K @ 3.40GHz	2030.05	362	1975.45	-3%
Intel Core i5-6200U @ 2.30GHz	1496.20	1001	1453.65	-3%
Intel Core i3-3240 @ 3.40GHz	1802.72	610	1751.47	-3%
Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.40GHz	2068.11	335	2008.14	-3%
Intel Core i5-4460 @ 3.20GHz	1942.49	457	1884.68	-3%
Intel Core i7-3770K @ 3.50GHz	2083.89	317	2017.98	-3%
Intel Core i3-3220 @ 3.30GHz	1755.62	655	1695.15	-3%
Intel Core i5-2410M @ 2.30GHz	1325.72	1195	1279.99	-3%
Intel Core i5-9400 @ 2.90GHz	2390.66	115	2307.29	-3%
AMD A9-9425	1466.85	1027	1414.39	-4%
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3 @ 3.30GHz	2094.96	307	2019.30	-4%
Intel Core i7-4770 @ 3.40GHz	2227.54	193	2139.53	-4%
Intel Core i5-4590 @ 3.30GHz	2117.21	284	2028.58	-4%
Intel Core i5-4690 @ 3.50GHz	2218.49	198	2123.53	-4%
Intel Core i7-4700MQ @ 2.40GHz	1809.02	606	1712.12	-5%
Intel Core i5-7600K @ 3.80GHz	2380.52	117	2251.74	-5%
AMD A8-7600 APU	1542.56	937	1458.70	-5%
Intel Core i5-7200U @ 2.50GHz	1714.41	716	1619.29	-6%
Intel Core i7-4790K @ 4.00GHz	2528.45	71	2382.61	-6%
Intel Core i7-4800MQ @ 2.70GHz	1992.73	399	1872.97	-6%
Intel Pentium B960 @ 2.20GHz	1069.74	1533	1002.51	-6%
Intel Pentium G3240 @ 3.10GHz	1794.93	618	1679.56	-6%
Intel Celeron N3350 @ 1.10GHz	766.43	2024	709.58	-7%
Intel Core i7-4790 @ 3.60GHz	2282.67	159	2086.23	-9%
Intel Core i3-2100 @ 3.10GHz	1584.45	876	1447.59	-9%
Intel Core i9-9880H @ 2.30GHz	2530.11	68	2310.25	-9%
Intel Core i7-4600U @ 2.10GHz	1690.38	745	1542.78	-9%
AMD A10-8700P	1220.24	1320	1111.05	-9%
Intel Core i7-3740QM @ 2.70GHz	1865.11	545	1695.01	-9%
Intel Core i3-7020U @ 2.30GHz	1288.96	1241	1169.76	-9%
Intel Core i3-2120 @ 3.30GHz	1690.58	744	1528.74	-10%
Intel Core i3-2310M @ 2.10GHz	1008.12	1629	906.01	-10%
Intel Core i3-4160 @ 3.60GHz	2070.75	333	1859.31	-10%
Intel Xeon E5-2643 @ 3.30GHz	1812.92	603	1625.12	-10%
Intel Xeon E5-1650 v2 @ 3.50GHz	2003.99	387	1784.50	-11%
AMD FX-8320 Eight-Core	1395.50	1110	1241.97	-11%
Intel Core i5-3210M @ 2.50GHz	1520.84	963	1349.94	-11%
Intel Core i5-2400 @ 3.10GHz	1747.92	675	1550.12	-11%
Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.30GHz	1899.42	506	1680.89	-12%
Intel Core i7-3930K @ 3.20GHz	1935.10	469	1710.35	-12%
Intel Core i5-2520M @ 2.50GHz	1492.05	1006	1318.68	-12%
Intel Core i7-5820K @ 3.30GHz	2025.12	368	1788.71	-12%
Intel Xeon E5-2689 @ 2.60GHz	1753.23	660	1547.06	-12%
Intel Core i7-2600K @ 3.40GHz	1940.67	463	1702.64	-12%
Intel Xeon E5-1620 @ 3.60GHz	1948.33	448	1707.82	-12%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X	2940.02	7	2572.10	-13%
Intel Core i7-960 @ 3.20GHz	1389.73	1121	1215.64	-13%
Intel Core i7-2600 @ 3.40GHz	1922.01	483	1679.00	-13%
Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.50GHz	2249.80	176	1961.85	-13%
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X	2980.43	4	2585.38	-13%
Intel Core i7-8550U @ 1.80GHz	2122.72	279	1840.38	-13%
Intel Core i7-7500U @ 2.70GHz	1910.50	495	1650.77	-14%
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X	2938.84	8	2532.66	-14%
Intel Core i3-4170 @ 3.70GHz	2128.08	273	1833.47	-14%
Intel Xeon E5-1650 @ 3.20GHz	1940.96	462	1668.80	-14%
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X	2905.79	13	2480.55	-15%
AMD Ryzen 9 3900	2952.38	6	2515.29	-15%
Intel Core i3-4005U @ 1.70GHz	939.31	1733	793.79	-15%
AMD Ryzen 5 3600	2803.98	19	2368.69	-16%
Intel Core i7-4810MQ @ 2.80GHz	2072.55	329	1749.48	-16%
AMD Ryzen 5 3600X	2911.51	11	2457.37	-16%
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X	2936.48	9	2476.57	-16%
AMD Ryzen 5 3500X	2770.94	23	2328.78	-16%
Intel Core i7-8850H @ 2.60GHz	2432.64	102	2035.13	-16%
AMD Ryzen 7 3800X	2978.64	5	2490.83	-16%

So new algorithms benefit some CPU families and hurt other CPU families. Overall the the average movement is close to 0% however (the gains equal the losses).

Looking just at the Ryzen results, as these seen to have been the most controversial.

The Ryzen 2000 series did better, while the 3000 series did worse. (You might be thinking that the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U & 3400G breaks this rule, but it seems AMD released their 3000 series mobile parts with the 3xxx name, even thought they were based on 2xxx series technology). So these are really 2000 series parts as well.

So comparing a 2000 series to a equivalent 3000 series in PT9 and PT10 we see.

AMD Ryzen 5 2600
PT9 single threaded score: 2004.09
PT10 single threaded score: 2089.57

AMD Ryzen 5 3600
PT9 single threaded score: 2803.98 (+40% generation gain)
PT10 single threaded score: 2368.69 (+13% generation gain)

So from the results above it seems in V9 we claimed new generation 3000 series was 40% faster for single threaded. Clearly this wasn't very reflective of real life. The 3000 series wasn't 40% faster, except maybe in a few edge cases. Now with V10 results we are claiming the 3000 series is 13% faster than the 2000 series. Which seems a much more plausible number and more reflective of real life applications. So I think from that point of view the new results are an definite improvement (although Ryzen 3000 owners might be slightly miffed. 2000 series owners probably won't complain however).

[HwGeek]

Dear David,
Thanks you for your detailed reply, but I am not sure how is it possible that even the low ST boost clock Intel i3 9100F can have better ST score then the new Ryzen 3900X while we all know for a fact that Zen 2.0 has around ~8% better IPC then Intel current Coffee Lake, if you stand behind those scores then I must say that this new ST benchmark score must be flawed and not representative for real life performance gap between 4.2Ghz Coffee Lake vs ~4.5Ghz Zen 2.0.

I hope that it's just a bug and soon the scores will stabilized because there is no way that current Intel Coffee Lake is around ~20% better in ST then the new Zen 2.0.

Best Regards,
HwGeek.

[BenchmarkManiac]

3700 PRO was fastest chip for V9. It is still the fastest AMD chip in V10, at least for the moment.

3900 PRO was second top, and now it is placed 31 losing 12% mark to 3700 PRO. 3950X was fourth fastest single threaded, now it is on 54 position.

3800X running 8 cores has cpu mark 23303. 9900KS running on faster base and turbo frequency only get 20400. At the same time 3800X is getting 20% lower points in single threaded test. How? This is weird. Single threaded test used to be an IPC performance benchmark and now it is like a random value +-20%. Well.. or it was random all these years.

[David (PassMark)]

9900 was the leader in the previous version of benchmark also

No it wasn't. Old V9 results can be found here.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/pt9_cpu_list.php
It was very very close thing, but the 9900KS was actually 3rd. But the difference was so small it is meaningless.

the previous leader among AMD chips 3950X

No it wasn't. Previous leader was Ryzen 9 PRO 3900.

The question is why the new algorithm is so inconsistent on AMD CPUs

3700 PRO was fastest chip for V9. It is still the fastest AMD chip in V10, at least for the moment. But I suspect once we get in a few more V10 results for this rare CPU it's results will drop a few percent.

In V9 the Ryzen 7 3800X was with 1.6% of the top score. In V10 Ryzen 7 3800X is within 16.2% of the top score. So yes, at least for the moment, there is a 14% relative drop for this AMD CPU in relative single threaded performance.

Ryzen 3 4300U is super rare. We've got zero results for it in V10. Even in V9 we only had one. So this result isn't accurate (especially in V10).
We'll look at doing some minor scaling on some of these rare CPUs.

or the single thread test is evaluated with some heavy second task running on the background.

No. It wouldn't be single threaded if there were multiple threads running.

AVX is not used on some AMD chips

The Single Threaded test is a combination of the Floating Point, Sorting and Compression tests.
Floating Point & Sorting make zero use of AVX. Compression uses open source Gzip code. But I would be surprised if compiler would be making heavy use of SIMD / AVX. Pretty much impossible that it is using AVX512, which is the main set of instructions AMD is missing. So I don't think this is part of the reason.