12-core AMD Strix Point Zen 5 engineering sample shows up in early Blender benchmarks, matches 8-core 7700X in performance

AMD Strix Point Blender benchmark appears
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

A Blender benchmark for an alleged AMD Strix Point CPU engineering sample has surfaced. The results aren't breathtaking, but many unknown factors make it hard to say if the score reflects the chip's true capabilities.

The benchmark was spotted by @9550Pro (HXL) and posted to X (formerly Twitter). HXL suggests the CPU is a Zen 5 Strix Point engineering sample with four performance and eight efficiency cores. Strix Point is the codename for AMD's upcoming Zen 5-based Ryzen mobile processors, which will succeed Zen 4 processors like the Ryzen 7 Pro 7840U.

In the Blender benchmark, the CPU demonstrated a median score of just 270.92. This is slightly better than the 8-core AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, which scored 269.02. The engineering sample also outperformed the Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core processor (267.89) and Intel Core i7-13700HX (255.58), to name just two examples.

On the other hand, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT 12-core processor outperformed the Strix Point engineering sample. However, that is a desktop CPU, not a low-power mobile processor.

In a possibly more apples-to-apples comparison, the Ryzen 7 Pro 7840U scored 216.09 on the Blender benchmark.

Blender’s benchmarks don’t mention power, an important factor in CPU performance. If this Strix Point sample shows a 65W Zen 5 CPU faring better than a 105W Zen 4 CPU, the results are encouraging.

We've recently spotted other benchmarks, including Geekbench 6 results, that were underwhelming at first glance.

Blender benchmarks scale almost perfectly with more cores and higher clock speeds. So, if this is, in fact, a 12-core Zen 5-based mobile CPU, it’s scoring right about where we’d expect it to.

The unknown factors mean we have to take these results with a grain of salt. We don’t really know the CPU configuration, and we have no idea how much power is supplied to the CPU. None of that is really important, though, if you’re interested in seeing the progress (in the way of benchmarks) of the new processor family in the interim before we can get our hands on the chips ourselves.

Freelance News Writer
  • Metal Messiah.
    The engineering sample also outperformed the Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core processor (267.89)

    On the other hand, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT 12-core processor outperformed the Strix Point engineering sample. However, that is a desktop CPU, not a low-power mobile processor.

    Uh ? Both are desktop chips though. The XT is only slightly faster in blender.
    Reply
  • Metal Messiah.
    So, if this is, in fact, a 12-core Zen 5-based mobile CPU, it’s scoring right about where we’d expect it to.

    It is indeed a 12-core chip. 100-000000994-38_Y. No room for doubt. Similar OPN 100-000000994-- IDs have been spotted multiple times.

    Engineering sample "100-000000994-03_N"

    https://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/show_host_detail.php?hostid=996435
    "100-000000994-14_N".

    https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/22423185
    "100-000000994-14_N"

    https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/22427061
    https://i.imgur.com/fZ8MubX.png
    https://i.imgur.com/xaaJUcq.jpeg
    Reply
  • helper800
    Metal Messiah. said:
    Uh ? Both are desktop chips though. The XT is only slightly faster in blender.
    A 100 mghz boost is apparently enough to tip the scales in this scenario, though it is odd to emphasize the 3900XT is a desktop chip and not mention it for the 3900X...
    Reply
  • TechyIT223
    That is a blender multi core score right?
    Reply
  • Metal Messiah.
    TechyIT223 said:
    That is a blender multi core score right?

    Yeah, but a lot of variables are still missing at this point. Although the performance seems pretty decent given this is an early engineering sample, and not the final silicon, and there is lack of info regarding the power, clock speeds, and test environment, the end result should be even better.

    The test doesn't reveal whether the four full-fat Zen 5 cores and eight Zen 5C compact cores were fully utilized to the max or not, but seeing that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D with 8 Zen 4 cores has a median score of 266.77, this new Strix Point SKU is still faster than this desktop part in this early stage !
    Reply
  • usertests
    Metal Messiah. said:
    Yeah, but a lot of variables are still missing at this point. Although the performance seems pretty decent given this is an early engineering sample, and not the final silicon, and there is lack of info regarding the power, clock speeds, and test environment, the end result should be equally impressive.

    The test doesn't reveal whether the four full-fat Zen 5 cores and eight Zen 5C compact cores were full utilized to the max or not, but seeing that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D with 8 Zen 4 cores has a median score of 266.77, this new Strix Point SKU is still faster than this desktop part in this early stage !
    Looking good so far. It may end up beating the 7900X.

    The (typical avg) IPC is still a big question, and it will be interesting to see how well the dual-CCX design works (with 16+8 cache).

    Also interesting to note will be which cores get disabled. 10-cores have shown up, but it could be 2+8, 4+6, or even 3+7.
    Reply
  • TechyIT223
    Metal Messiah. said:
    Yeah, but a lot of variables are still missing at this point. Although the performance seems pretty decent given this is an early engineering sample, and not the final silicon, and there is lack of info regarding the power, clock speeds, and test environment, the end result should be even better.

    The test doesn't reveal whether the four full-fat Zen 5 cores and eight Zen 5C compact cores were fully utilized to the max or not, but seeing that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D with 8 Zen 4 cores has a median score of 266.77, this new Strix Point SKU is still faster than this desktop part in this early stage !
    Thank you. That makes sense.
    Reply