by 
Cinebench R20 is based on technology of the well-known Digital Content Creation Software, Cinema 4D, but now utilizes the R20 Version’s Render Engine.
This updated rendering Benchmark now supports the AVX command set which will give us more realistic results of how modern Processors behave in multi-threaded workloads such as CPU Rendering.
Cinebench R20 is also great for finding the best CPUs for lightly-threaded workloads such as 3D Modeling and Animation and Video Editing.
Cinebench R20 Scores List
Cinebench R20 benches two CPU performance Values:
- Multi-Core-Score. This score will tell you how fast the CPU is in multi-processing tasks that utilize all of the available Cores. This includes rendering, encoding and other computational multi-threaded work
- Single-Core Score. The Cinebench R20 Single Core Score tells you how fast the CPU is when only a single Core is utilized. This is often a good metric for Software and Viewport snappiness and overall active work performance
▮ = AMD | ▮ = Intel
| CPU Name | Cores | Ghz | Single Score | Multi Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMD Ryzen 3 3300X | 4 | 3.8 | 499 | 2597 |
| Intel i9 9960X | 16 | 3.1 | 450 | 7920 |
| AMD Threadripper 2950X | 16 | 3.5 | 449 | 7003 |
| Intel i9 9980XE | 18 | 3.0 | 448 | 8791 |
| Intel i7 9750H | 6 | 2.6 | 442 | 2653 |
| AMD Threadripper 2920X | 12 | 3.5 | 439 | 5843 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 2600X | 6 | 3.6 | 421 | 3048 |
| Intel i9 9940X | 14 | 3.3 | 451 | 6945 |
| Intel i7 8750H | 6 | 2.2 | 419 | 2497 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 3400G | 4 | 3.7 | 417 | 1995 |
| AMD Threadripper 1950X | 16 | 3.4 | 411 | 6731 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 2700X | 8 | 3.7 | 411 | 3956 |
| Intel i5 8400 | 6 | 2.8 | 411 | 2291 |
| AMD Threadripper 1920X | 12 | 3.5 | 406 | 5326 |
| Intel i5 8600K | 6 | 3.6 | 406 | 2181 |
| AMD Threadripper 2970WX | 24 | 3.0 | 418 | 9624 |
| AMD Threadripper 1900X | 8 | 3.8 | 403 | 3678 |
| Intel i9 9920X | 12 | 3.5 | 457 | 6032 |
| Intel i9 7900X | 10 | 3.3 | 461 | 5286 |
| Intel i9 9900KS | 8 | 4.0 | 508 | 5227 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 3800X | 8 | 3.9 | 508 | 5054 |
| Intel i9 9900K | 8 | 3.6 | 500 | 4914 |
| Intel i9 9900KF | 8 | 3.6 | 500 | 4916 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 3700X | 8 | 3.6 | 494 | 4856 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 3600X | 6 | 3.8 | 492 | 3895 |
| Intel i9 9900X | 10 | 3.5 | 458 | 5402 |
| Intel i7 7800X | 6 | 3.5 | 481 | 3752 |
| Intel i5 9600KF | 6 | 3.7 | 481 | 2624 |
| Intel i7 8700K | 6 | 3.7 | 479 | 3793 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 3600 | 6 | 3.6 | 474 | 3539 |
| Intel i7 9700K | 8 | 3.6 | 466 | 3656 |
| Intel i7 9700KF | 8 | 3.6 | 466 | 3656 |
| Intel i7 7700K | 4 | 4.2 | 466 | 2257 |
| Intel i5 9600K | 6 | 3.7 | 481 | 2624 |
| AMD Ryzen 9 3900X | 12 | 3.8 | 511 | 7100 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | 8 | 3.2 | 403 | 3448 |
| AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 | 4 | 3.1 | 399 | 1558 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 2500U | 4 | 2.0 | 328 | 1352 |
| Intel Xeon Gold 6148 | 20 | 2.4 | 320 | 6342 |
| AMD Epyc 7451 | 24 | 2.3 | 317 | 6768 |
| AMD Ryzen 3 2200G | 4 | 3.5 | 308 | 1307 |
| AMD Epyc 7601 | 32 | 2.2 | 307 | 7445 |
| Intel Xeon Platinum 8160 | 24 | 2.1 | 286 | 5259 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 1700 | 8 | 3.0 | 331 | 3189 |
| AMD Threadripper 3960X | 24 | 3.8 | 510 | 13551 |
| Intel i9 10980XE | 18 | 3.0 | 480 | 8846 |
| AMD Threadripper 3990X | 64 | 2.9 | 501 | 24803 |
| Intel i9 10900K | 10 | 3.7 | 524 | 6399 |
| Intel i7 10700K | 8 | 3.8 | 497 | 5292 |
| Intel i5 10500 | 6 | 3.1 | 467 | 3392 |
| Intel i3 10320 | 4 | 3.8 | 477 | 2444 |
| AMD Threadripper 3970X | 32 | 3.7 | 509 | 17448 |
| Intel i7 8850H | 6 | 2.6 | 403 | 2468 |
| Intel i7 8700 | 6 | 3.2 | 331 | 3547 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 1700X | 8 | 3.4 | 344 | 3336 |
| AMD Threadripper 2990WX | 32 | 3.0 | 398 | 11463 |
| Intel i5 8300H | 4 | 2.3 | 397 | 1689 |
| Intel i5 8600 | 6 | 3.1 | 395 | 2051 |
| AMD Epyc 7702P | 64 | 2.0 | 393 | 18864 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 2400G | 4 | 3.6 | 391 | 1911 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1600X | 6 | 3.3 | 389 | 2764 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1500X | 4 | 3.5 | 341 | 1811 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 1800X | 8 | 3.6 | 381 | 3587 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 2600 | 6 | 3.4 | 374 | 2736 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 3700U | 4 | 2.3 | 367 | 1515 |
| Intel i7 8650U | 4 | 1.9 | 365 | 1299 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 1600 | 6 | 3.2 | 357 | 2501 |
| AMD Ryzen 5 3500U | 4 | 2.1 | 354 | 1483 |
| AMD Ryzen 7 2700U | 4 | 2.2 | 349 | 1387 |
| Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 | 28 | 2.5 | 376 | 8585 |
| AMD Ryzen 9 3950X | 16 | 3.5 | 518 | 9165 |
| CPU Name | Cores | GHz | Single Score | Multi Score |
Download Cinebench R20 here
Download Cinebench R20 Benchmark for your System, it’s free, and test-drive your CPU to be able to compare it with the ones in this list.
After building a new PC anyone should test their new hardware with all kinds of benchmarks, such as Cinebench R20, to see if the hardware performs the way it should.
Download Cinebench R20
How to read these Scores
Ok, some more Info about these Cinebench Results: Cinebench Scores are linear.
This means a CPU that scores 2000 Cinebench points will be twice as fast (in Cinema 4D Rendering) as a CPU that scores 1000 Cinebench points.
Up to 256 threads are supported
In Cinebench R20, Maxon has significantly improved the scaling with many threads so that future processors can still be reliably tested: Up to 256 Threads are now supported.
Furthermore, a more complex ray-tracing scene is being used, which, according to the developer, requires eight times as much computing effort and four times as much memory compared to the now well-known scene from Cinebench R15.
Thanks to the photorealistic appearance of the rendered scene, the updated Benchmark should now also give a much better impression of what such programs are used for and what Cinema 4D is capable of in its newest version.
Once again, Cinebench R20 is a benchmark for single-threaded and multi-threaded CPU performance. The OpenGL Benchmark, that was included in Cinebench R15, has now been removed though, as it did not test the underlying OpenGL performance well.
4016 pts multi core
R5 3600 all core OC 4,4Ghz, MSI MAG B550, Corsair Vengance 3200 cl16, e-sports duo cooler.
Not stable in stress tests but at least I got above 4k in cinebench multicore =P
https://freeimage.host/i/2Koha1
Xeon E3-1231 v3 @3.40GHz 4c/8t
4x4GB DDR3 1600MHz (9-9-9-24) dual channel
1729 pts @multi_core
364 pts @single_core
5939 on my TR2920x (Threaripper 2920x). 4,2 on all cores.
I just oc’d my 1950x for an all core 4.0ghz and did a 7465 in CB20. My more standard 3.9 ghz oc scores 7327.
I got 3726 when I was getting 3520 with a ryzen 5 3600. currently at 4.2 ghz undervolted to 1.306volts
10113
3950X, cores clocked to 4,35 GHz, 3200 MHz 14 latency RAM, Noctua air cooler
my 3950x / taichi motherboard cinebench r20 score is 9564. I am not overclocking. memory is nothing special, 3200 mhz. interesting that results would vary so much.
In single core performance I got my i5 9600k OC @5.1ghz at 1.35v to a 521 on cinebench, which is somehow better than all of these.
how comes the ryzen is stronger in singlecore and multicore but still can maages to win again the i7 7700k in gaming?
Hey Bruh,
Cinebench is a Benchmark that is often referred to as a benchmark that AMD CPUs perform well in. So always take a look at many different benchmarks to find the true performance of a cpu. Unless of course you want to render in cinema 4d, then cinebench is the best benchmark for you! 🙂
Cheers,
Alex
I just base the performance on the game. I can bench all day overclock and bench some more, but games usually show the true picture in the end and the actual work flow you’re doing. the multithreading on the ryzen is better, but multithreading also has its limits in some applications still, where sometimes just raw clock speeds help more.
But Ryzen IS faster than Kaby Lake (Intel 7th Gen) at modern 1080p gaming…. A LOT has changed with how games are made since early 2017 when Kaby Lake & 1st gen Ryzen launched & the former was absolutely beating the living heck out of the latter in gaming despite having 1/2 as many cores.
Fast forward just 3 years to today, and the 6-core/12-thread Ryzen 5 1600 is absolutely EVISCERATING the 4-core/4-thread i5-7600K in modern titles when the opposite was true when they launched (just 4x CPU threads simply isn’t enough for the latest games anymore). And the same mostly applies to the 8c/16t R7 1800X (or OC’d 1700/X) vs the 4c/8t i7-7700K. And modern, 3rd Gen Ryzen straight up ANNIHILATES the 7700K from orbit. Hardware Unboxed compared Ryzen 1000 & Kaby Lake in modern gaming in some recent videos if you want to check for yourself. Games/game engines are FAR more multi-threaded now, & next-gen API’s with ground-up multi-threading support like DirectX 12 & Vulkan are only getting more & more common.
TL;DR – It’s because quad-cores weren’t quiiiiiite dead yet in 2017 when both Ryzen & the Intel 7th Gen were launched. But with modern games/engines they’re pretty freaking dead now; with those with SMT/”Hyper-Threading” like the i7-7700K just barely hanging on & those without like the i5-7600K having absolutely MISERABLE performance & consistency. Anyone who bought a Ryzen 1000 instead of a Kaby Lake CPU for gaming, just bc they were told it would age much better in the long run got the last laugh. Especially the “got a R5 1600 instead of an i5-7600K” crowd.
Dude , I currently Use a Ryzen processor R7 2700 non x. So Im a fan . But Intel is better for gaming ..I score 91% gaming score on Userbenchmark with this system ..as in between refreshes I have the #1 R7 2700 on userbenchmark… and for basically any site …On Air /Aio Im either #1 or have been at various points. So Again..Im a fan.
I get 446 Single core score without disabling SMT on CBr20 for instance. 488-490 on CPUZ singleT score depending what version ya run. But even in Battlefield 5 which tends to favor threads and Amd on a lot of charts…My Wifes I5 4790k (devils canyon) is within 10 frames of me lol …thats with DDr3 ram on her setup but give her my 3dcard.
But something the INTEL Fan boys won’t admit is inspite of youtube and anything you read… in games ppl play even the more cpu intensive games like bf5 , yer talking an entire 10-15 frames between my cheap 2 year old Ryzen processor and a current 500 dollar Intel processor. at 1080p..OOOOOOOOO so much wow !! Lets not feed into the same BS as them Ryzen is a great value and ALOT of fun to tinker with but Intel makes fantastic processors as well.
Btw , lets say You OC the ever loving crap out of the 10900k (i would) now rut roh 20 frames / sec better than What im getting at 1080p. Maybe its worth it if you run 165-24x Hz monitor ..(most ppl dont)
Mind ya … I could just not play at Ultra and hit 165 fps in BF5 right now anyway and thats with a 2060super. Intel is better but its subjective weather or not you will get any use out of the increased framerate , esp if you play at higher resolutions.
3900X FCLK 1900 Memory 3600 16-16-16-36 CPU 4300 ALL CORE, CB SCORE =7735
Hi there!
8750H with 1x8GB ddr4 ram @2666MHz
425 pts @single_core
2695 pts @multi_core
photo proof: https://ibb.co/5c3mtpy
NOTE: I increased the TDP limits of my cpu with ThrottleStop so that it was not throttled due to power usage. Also the cooling of my laptop is sufficient to maintain the elevated power draw which allowed my cpu to hit 3.9GHz all cores and 4.1GHz single core frequency under load.