LuxMark v4.0

Next up is LuxMark, a long-time standing OpenCL benchmark.  We are using the newest version 4.0 which provides new render scenes supporting Path Tracing.  The two scenes we are going to test are “Hall Bench” and “Food.”  Hall Bench is a Path Tracing + Global Illumination test.  The Food benchmark is a pure brute force Path Tracing test.  The result given is an overall score.

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT LuxMark Hall Bench Graph

In the Hall Bench test above the Radeon RX 6700 XT improves upon the Radeon RX 5700 XT by 24%.  Unfortunately, it is thoroughly trounced on by the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti and GeForce RTX 3070.  The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is 22% faster, and the RTX 3070 is 39% faster.  Once again, if the RX 6700 XT is priced closer to RTX 3070, the RTX 3070 is massively faster here.

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT LuxMark Food Graph

In the Food bench above the Radeon RX 6700 XT is 18% faster than the Radeon RX 5700 XT.  However, once again the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3070 are faster.  The RTX 3060 Ti is a whopping 47% faster and the RTX 3070 is a huge 70% faster.  Remember, this is OpenCL vs. OpenCL here, same renderer.

SPECviewperf 2020

SPECviewperf 2020 is a traditional benchmark for testing workstation application performance on GPUs.  It uses very common and standard applications used in the professional workstation-class arena.  We are using the new 2020 version which includes newly updated tests.  The applications tested are 3dsmax, catia, creo, energy, maya, medical, snx and solidworks. In our graphs below, the green bar is RTX 3070, the grey bar is RTX 3060 Ti, the orange bar is RX 6700 XT and the blue bar is RX 5700 XT.  We are running these tests at 3840×2160 (4K.)

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT SPECviewperf 2020 4K graph

Let’s start with 3dsmax.  The Radeon RX 6700 XT does provide a big upgrade from the Radeon RX 5700 XT here, 64% which is pretty significant.  The RX 6700 XT performs just under the RTX 3060 Ti, but they are close.  However, the RTX 3070 is 12% faster than the RX 6700 XT.  At least the RX 6700 XT is sort of keeping up in this app, better than the RX 5700 XT anyway.

Now let’s look at catia.  This one surprised us, the RX 6700 XT is actually just a smidge above the RTX 3060 Ti finally.  However, the RTX 3070 is still faster by 12%.

Things fall back again in creo though, the RX 6700 XT falls way back from even the RTX 3060 Ti.  The RX 6700 XT doesn’t seem to be that much faster than the RX 5700 XT here.  The RTX 3060 Ti is a big 29% faster and the RTX 3070 is 37% faster.

Then things take a turn in the energy test, the Radeon RX 6700 XT for the first time in all the testing is actually faster than the RTX 3070, slightly.  Though, the number grouping is pretty tight for this test.

Things go back again though in the maya test.  The RX 6700 XT is falling way behind the RTX 3060 Ti.  The RTX 3060 Ti is 16% faster and the RTX 3070 is 33% faster.

The medical test is another test of tight groupings.  However, like the energy test, the Radeon RX 6700 XT is the faster video card in this application.

We also see a very positive result for the Radeon RX 6700 XT in snx.  For whatever reason, the two RTX video cards fall way behind here, the reason is unknown.  This puts the Radeon RX 6700 XT on top by 310% compared to the GeForce RTX 3070!  Either something is bottlenecking the RTX cards here, or the RX 6700 XT has some kind of advantage we are unaware of in this application.

In solidworks the Radeon RX 6700 XT falls behind again though, the RTX 3060 Ti is 37% faster and the RTX 3070 is 57% faster.

Brent Justice

Brent Justice has been reviewing computer components for 20+ years, educated in the art and method of the computer hardware review he brings experience, knowledge, and hands-on testing with a gamer oriented...

Join the Conversation

10 Comments

  1. I had thought that AMD’s solutions for Professionals and Creators were always solid an competitive. Boy was I wrong! Thanks for the follow-through on another great review Brent!

    nVidia’s OPTIX is really a game-changer it seems with respects to performance. Those Blender times are nuts!

  2. The Vulkan test was interesting – virtually unchanged from the 5700. Makes me wonder if it’s immature drivers causing some of this, as every other test shows at least some architectural improvements. That would be a heck of a driver bug – but hey, it’s AMD, drivers… yeah.

    Or maybe they just heavily optimized gaming, after years of optimizing compute only to lose on gaming benchmarks… possible but doesn’t fit the pattern.

  3. I guess for most people this shouldn’t be an issue. But I’d still get the RTX3070 if only becuase I’ve been waiting for so long… :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

    nVidia’s OPTIX is really a game-changer it seems with respects to performance. Those Blender times are nuts!

    RTX cores at its best.

  4. Glad you guys decided to look at workstation productivity shiznit, as I know you were thinking about doing such. Very interesting stuff. Great article! Hope to see more like it in the future. Yyeeaahh sadly the way things are, CUDA and OptiX and NVENC are unstoppable. nVidia is kinda the only real choice for these kinds of workloads. Radeons don’t even win with the OpenCL stuff.
  5. The productivity stuff doesn’t mean much to me, but the streaming capabilities and nvidia broadcast tip the scale IMO.

    BTW some photoshop/vegas filter benchmarks would be welcomed.

  6. The productivity stuff doesn’t mean much to me, but the streaming capabilities and nvidia broadcast tip the scale IMO.

    Same; I need to test RTX voice out on something that has RTX though. That’s a big one for me given that it’s pretty hard and pretty inconvenient to get to a place where the ambient noise is below the noise floor of the recording equipment!

  7. As someone who has been using gpu computing in a professional field for a long time, there is a reason we only ever consider buying nvidia gpus.
    And it’s not like the CPU market where AMD can just pull an ace like with the CPU market against intel. In their absence, they allowed nvidia to become so entrenched in the professional gpu market that they stand no chance. Many software uses proprietary nvidia technology that makes AMD a non player even if it had the performance.
  8. As someone who has been using gpu computing in a professional field for a long time, there is a reason we only ever consider buying nvidia gpus.
    And it’s not like the CPU market where AMD can just pull an ace like with the CPU market against intel. In their absence, they allowed nvidia to become so entrenched in the professional gpu market that they stand no chance. Many software uses proprietary nvidia technology that makes AMD a non player even if it had the performance.

    I’ve said this dozens of times, not only do you get great performance hardware with nvidia, but better support and middleware that makes it a much better choice. Cry all you want for OpenCL, CUDA is the de facto standard in many content creation applications. OPTIX is also orders of magnitude faster than anything AMD has to offer and don’t even get me started with AI and inferencing.

    AMD has to invest in middleware if they want to compete on the high end, for years AMD was a compute monster but all that power got to waste in most professional applications.

  9. AMD has done a great job closing the hardware gap this generation. This is especially true given how far behind NVIDIA they’ve been over the last few years. However, the software front is an entirely different story. On the gaming end, they still lack a competitive alternative to DLSS. On the professional side, the above post covers it pretty well so I’ll leave it at that.
Leave a comment