AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G APUs performance unveiled

Page 31 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
It may just be a country/currency gap though. I notice a lot of those who are very interested in the APUs are also those on a heavy budget not from the US. At least anecdotally. If your budget forces you into an APU only solution and you live in the USA, you have bigger problems going on in your life to address. My personal opinion.
I'm going to say that at current GPU prices, quite a few people will temporary settle on APU solutions until prices go back to MSRPs.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
642
126
It's not just that.
It's that we run through the same TIRED arguments from those who are very bullish on AMD products time and time again.
It's always been that AMD will levarge the graphics IP to make people want the CPU....

What actually made people buy AMD cpus? AMD improving their CPU!!!
Instead, you see a large contingent of people still focused heavily on the "APU".

It may just be a country/currency gap though. I notice a lot of those who are very interested in the APUs are also those on a heavy budget not from the US. At least anecdotally. If your budget forces you into an APU only solution and you live in the USA, you have bigger problems going on in your life to address. My personal opinion.
I agree. Personally, I have a very hard time buying into the "I am going to buy or build a PC (500 dollars plus at least), and become a PC gamer, but I am too poor to afford a hundred dollar gpu or buy a game, so I will only play e-sports on AMD apus." Seems like a very small niche at best, or more likely, an artificially constructed scenario to justify an APU. The only thing that makes APUs even remotely attractive now for the desktop is that the discrete market is in shambles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tential

neblogai

Member
Oct 29, 2017
144
49
101
I agree. Personally, I have a very hard time buying into the "I am going to buy or build a PC (500 dollars plus at least), and become a PC gamer, but I am too poor to afford a hundred dollar gpu or buy a game, so I will only play e-sports on AMD apus." Seems like a very small niche at best, or more likely, an artificially constructed scenario to justify an APU. The only thing that makes APUs even remotely attractive now for the desktop is that the discrete market is in shambles.
Even A8 9600 can run almost any game- at a frame rate tens of millions of console gamers are satisfied with. Here, with Raven Ridge, we are talking about ~2x faster chips- and you still say- 'only for e-sports'.
 

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,527
761
136
Funny how when AMD utterly destroys Intel in integrated performance its not important and suddenly there is going to be a GT2030 released very soon(just to try and scare people off getting a Ryzen 3 2200,etc if they can),but if Intel is even 10% faster with a £100 CPU in a game at 720p with a Titan Xp its huge or is 5% faster in SuperPi its massive!!

I just love the continual moving of boundaries here, and the inability to even admit AMD has a very good all round product here,since they are terrified to even admit Intel is barely even competitive here. The same people all the time in AMD threads making up false arguments,ie,all integrated graphics crap as a blanket statement,so they can ignore the fact Intel integrated graphics at under £200 is utterly rubbish. Even Intel knows it - they commissioned AMD to make a GPU for them and hired one of their own GPU people!

Its utterly funny when we as PC gamers should be quite happy that even a $99 APU,will probably run some reasonably popular games at OK settings,and that it means that the cost of even an entry level gaming system will be even cheaper,and that applies to many prebuilt PCs.

I know people who are PC gamers who use very low end cards and Intel integrated graphics to game on,and even a Ryzen 3 2200G would be significantly faster.

Yet interestingly enough on UK forums like Overclockers UK,which has a ton of enthusiasts,even people who have Titan Xp and Titan V cards,they seem far more positive about APUs like the Ryzen 2200G,as it seems cheaper than a Core i3 8100,and has a good integrated graphics chip too. Great for a basic light gaming rig,general purpose rig or even a solid HTPC.
 
Last edited:

piesquared

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,651
473
136
It's not just that.
It's that we run through the same TIRED arguments from those who are very bullish on AMD products time and time again.
It's always been that AMD will levarge the graphics IP to make people want the CPU....

What actually made people buy AMD cpus? AMD improving their CPU!!!
Instead, you see a large contingent of people still focused heavily on the "APU".

It may just be a country/currency gap though. I notice a lot of those who are very interested in the APUs are also those on a heavy budget not from the US. At least anecdotally. If your budget forces you into an APU only solution and you live in the USA, you have bigger problems going on in your life to address. My personal opinion.

You are just regurgitating old talking points, which no longer work for the new Ryzen APUs. The large contingent of people focusing on the APU is because it is these APUs that can replaces a system with a CPU and a low end GPU, like the 1030, both in CPU and GPU performance, or close enough that it won't make sense to buy 2 different components to end up with the same results. And have the added complexity of having to manage 2 different driver sets and 2 different software packages, while having to register for that Geforce Experience with all the data mining that goes with that software i might add. Where's the advantage in all that!?
 

piesquared

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,651
473
136
Funny how when AMD utterly destroys Intel in integrated performance its not important and suddenly there is going to be a GT2030 released very soon,but if Intel is even 10% faster in a game at 720p with a Titan Xp its huge or is 5% faster in SuperPi.

I just love the continual moving of boundaries here, and the inability to even admit AMD has a very good all round product here,since they are terrified to even admit Intel is barely even competitive here. The same people all the time in AMD threads making up false arguments,ie,all integrated graphics crap as a blanket statement,so they can ignore the fact Intel integrated graphics at under £200 is utterly rubbish.

Its utterly funny when we as PC gamers should be quite happy that even a $99 APU,will probably run some reasonably popular games at OK settings,and that it means that the cost of even an entry level gaming system will be even cheaper,and that applies to many prebuilt PCs.

Yet interestingly enough on UK forums like Overclockers UK,which has a ton of enthusiasts,even people who have Titan Xp and Titan V cards,they seem far more positive about APUs like the Ryzen 2200G,as it seems cheaper than a Core i3 8100,and has a good integrated graphics chip too. Great for a basic light gaming rig,general purpose rig or even a solid HTPC.

The most hilarious part of it all, is that with those prior APUs that destroyed intel's APUs in terms of GPU performance, these boards were full of people claiming that it doesn't matter because the CPU performance is so weak. Well now these Ryzen APUs have a much stronger CPU and still obliterates the intel APU's GPU performance, competing around the same performance level as a low end discrete GPU like the 1030. Maybe somebody could explain the advantage of having those 2 components over the single Ryzen G series APU at the same level of performance.

*with a massive amount of headroom for overclocking.
 

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,743
611
126
  • Like
Reactions: tential

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,527
761
136
The most hilarious part of it all, is that with those prior APUs that destroyed intel's APUs in terms of GPU performance, these boards were full of people claiming that it doesn't matter because the CPU performance is so weak. Well now these Ryzen APUs have a much stronger CPU and still obliterates the intel APU's GPU performance, competing around the same performance as a low end discrete GPU like the 1030. Maybe somebody could explain the advantage of having those 2 components over the single Ryzen APU at the same level of performance.
Its shifting goals. Looking at the RRP of the Ryzen 3 2200G at $99,it looks like it will be cheaper than the Core i3 8100,faster than a Ryzen 3 1200,overclockable and have a integrated graphics solution capable of even running some popular games reasonably OK(Overwatch,etc) and a solid CPU cooler to boot. Then you factor in the cheaper motherboards,and so on it looks a compelling all-round package. One CCX might also even help with some older games as well.

So even if someone wants a better card,I doubt for 90% of games it will be a bottleneck with the kind of cards,someone who buys a $99 CPU would pair them with.

Its even worse when cards are so expensive due to mining - even lower end ones are being affected which is crazy.

Also computerbase.de reporting on Intel hiring a crisis management firm for their security issues,also mentioned an interesting thing:

https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https://www.computerbase.de/2018-01/sard-verbinnen-intel-spectre-meltdown/&edit-text=

Intel postpones product launches
Internally, the problems of recent weeks at Intel have already caused the shifts of new products. New CPUs and motherboards now without the right patches to publish, would probably only pour oil into the fire, so the upcoming launches are once exposed. Of these, in addition to the new NUCs with Gemini Lake and Kaby Lake-G probably also affected Coffee Lake , whose second wave of CPUs and motherboards is already in the starting blocks. For CES 2018 , these were already behind closed doors to see whether the known date of late Q1 or April can be held, but now remains questionable.
This hints that entry level Coffee Lake motherboards are delayed and also by extension the lower priced Coffee Lake CPUs like the dual core Pentiums.

So at this point,a Ryzen 3 2200G and A320 or B350 motherboard is going to be cheaper than any Intel Core i3 8100 combo and a G4560 combo is on a platform with poor value CPUs in most of the world,and Ryzen is getting a refresh with better performance. In the UK for example even a Core i5 7500 is still £159 on Amazon.

They are worried someone might buy the AMD CPU over say an Intel Pentium or Core i3,so by making blanket and disingenuous statements that all integrated graphics cannot run games,they can try their best to invalidate one big advantage AMD has over Intel and push Intel,ie,its 10% in a game at 720p using a £1000 graphics card or something like that(or whatever the number might be),with a motherboard which currently costs as much as the flipping CPU. Also,I predict once the Ryzen APUs are released for desktop even if the reviews are very positive,some will start suddenly pushing the Coffee Lake Pentium and lower end boards even if it takes months to appear,and say a make belief GT2030 appearing "soon" even if the whole shebang would cost more overall.

If you look at things a different way even a Ryzen 3 2200G and a GT1030 will still cost less than a Ryzen 3 1200 or Core i3 8100 with the same graphics card. So unless the Ryzen 3 2200G has some weird CPU performance bug,I am not even seeing why it should not even be considered for its CPU performance alone for the $99 RRP,even ignoring the integrated graphics. Adding solid integrated graphics looks like the icing on the cake.

Oh well,you can't always please all of the people all of the time.
 
Last edited:

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,023
377
126
I find this a little interesting
here is a review from mid 2011 from the first "APU"


the APU was $150, the GT 430 was $79 both had similar memory bandwidth (DDR3 128bit 1800 for the gt 430)

looks like Llano had a more competitive IGP than this new APU compared to a low end Nvidia card of this price point.
the main difference is the CPU being a lot more competitive now.
 

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,527
761
136
If AMD had something like the 2400G back in 2013 with good Linux support, I would have chosen that over the i5 for my build. A 4c/8t CPU for less then I what paid for my Haswell i5? Hell yes!!!
You also have to take into consideration the cheaper motherboards. So looking on Scan,a Core i3 8100 and the cheapest Z370 board(cheaper than even mATX competitors) is £196:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/intel-core-i3-8100-s-1151-coffee-lake-quad-core-4-thread-36ghz-6mb-cache-1100mhz-gpu-65w-cpu-box
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/gigabyte-z370p-d3-intel-z370-s-1151-ddr4-sata3-m2-2-way-crossfire-realtek-gbe-usb-31-gen1-a-atx

The Ryzen 3 2200G RRP is $99,so should be £84 to £90 including VAT,and the cheapest B350 ATX board is £79:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/asrock-ab350-pro4-amd-b350-s-am4-ddr4-sata3-m2-(pcie-sata)-realtek-lan-usb-30-aplusc-atx
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/gigabyte-ab350-gaming-amd-b350-s-am4-ddr4-sata3-m2-(pcie-sata)-realtek-lan-usb-31-a-atx

The cheapest mATX B350 board is £71:

https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/motherboards-amd/amd-b350-socket-am4-microatx-motherboards
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/msi-b350m-gaming-pro-amd-ryzen-am4-microatx-motherboard

If you want to overclock,the Ryzen 3 2200G combo could be between £30 to £40 cheaper in the UK. If you don't want to overclock,A320 boards start at £50,so that would push it closer to £60.

So in theory a Ryzen 3 2200G and a GT1030 could be had for the same price as a Core i3 8100 and the cheapest board for Coffee Lake on Scan. If you were to purchase a Core i3 8100 and a GT1030,its possible you could get a Ryzen 3 2200G and a GT1050,etc.

Now this is UK pricing so YMMV.

Hence,I don't understand all this fault finding with this release,it looks decent value with the integrated graphics and without.

If that computerbase.de article is right about the delays to the rest of the Coffee Lake roll out it,then AMD really has a more compelling product,bar any unusual performance metrics.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
Define good linxux support?
GPU Passthrough on threadripper requires an ugly patch. That will definitely leave a bad taste in my mouth. I don't hear great things about Threadripper, not terrible, but definitely requires work, more work than I'd personally be up to since I'm a Linux noob.
I'm waiting for second gen products for Linux support personally. TR2 is what I'm waiting for to ensure my server upgrade will run well.
Otherwise, I'll pick up a cheap Xeon off ebay and be satisfied that there are TONS of other people on my platform who have encountered similar problems.

For basic Linux operation? I don't know enough but I can't imagine it wouldn't work well.

That's my main issue is troubleshooting and trying to find info. If you don't have a CPU/Mobo/etc. that others have, finding info sucks.

That's why AMD's strat of getting their products as far reaching as humanly possible is smart. Serves so many purposes.
Well Ryzen CPUs are already supported in 3.14.x.x kernels with RR support in 4.15..x.x. I had used AMD Athlons before AMD dropped the ball without any issues.
 

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,470
1,683
136
While I commend AMD for producing a fine product with Raven Ridge, it just doesn't make sense for me. I've just traded for an I7-3770k and board which will house my 16GB of ram. I currently use an NVS 510 as my video card (4 displays), but that's not needed going forward. An RR would only be a minor gpu upgrade, but would require a lot of money for the board, gpu and RAM. For a LOT less money, I can get a 4GB RX560 that will make a big difference for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: french toast

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,527
761
136
Now its getting even worse - new Intel can't compete,so lets look at secondhand Intel bits. LMAO! :D

So why should anyone buy a Core i3 8100,when you can get a secondhand Core i7 of some sort? Why bother with a Core i5 8400 or Core i5 8600K (which I am seriously considering but want to see what Ryzen+ is like first) when you can get a secondhand Core i7 6700??

I don't see the point of the Core i5 8400 or Skylake in general. I have 16GB of DDR3 in my Core i7 3770 system already,and a secondhand Core i7 4770k makes them all look expensive. Silly Intel.

You never hear those kind of arguments in Intel threads.

Look at the levels people are trying to bury the integrated graphics advantage AMD has over similar NEW Intel products,or the significantly cheaper platform,or the cheaper price of the CPUs.

This is like people who will buy some really knackered slow iPhone over a much more modern and brand new Android one,since "Apple".
 
Last edited:

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,574
126
I'm not sure why AMD APUs have not been that popular. They have been superior to Intel's IGP for a long time, and with Kaveri in January of 2014 they were well out in front.
I built a Kaveri system for a friend that was a great performer for the money..

My guess is that overall, if people want good graphics, they prefer to buy a DGPU that can be upgraded.

If they don't need good graphics, Intel's IGP has been good enough, while also having a better CPU.

Ryzen APUs would theoretically bring along what was missing, a good CPU.

I still suspect that overall, people will not be enthusiastic about integrated graphics for decent levels of gaming, and will prefer a DGPU that can be upgraded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tential

neblogai

Member
Oct 29, 2017
144
49
101
The only thing better than this for gaming is an Xbox One or PS4... Good breaks for AMD again!
Consoles are not really cheap for gaming. It is very well illustrated by their market: their sales are basically in the richest countries of the world. It is so, because people in the poorer countries are aware that console initial cost is just the start- you also have to pay monthly for playing online, and games are more expensive/can not be pirated. And that is if we think console vs PC for the kid. Because in third world and developing countries most families will try to choose only one such expensive device for their home- and it will naturally be PC for essential tasks- facebook, banking, storing family pictures, etc. If kids want to play games- parents will either lend their phone/get a $100 tablet (free android games), or get basic gaming capability for their PC. This way is much cheaper, than also buying a console for hundreds of dollars just for kid's gaming.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
I'm not sure why AMD APUs have not been that popular. They have been superior to Intel's IGP for a long time, and with Kaveri in January of 2014 they were well out in front.
I built a Kaveri system for a friend that was a great performer for the money..

My guess is that overall, if people want good graphics, they prefer to buy a DGPU that can be upgraded.

If they don't need good graphics, Intel's IGP has been good enough, while also having a better CPU.

Ryzen APUs would theoretically bring along what was missing, a good CPU.

I still suspect that overall, people will not be enthusiastic about integrated graphics for decent levels of gaming, and will prefer a DGPU that can be upgraded.
Depends, notebooks, SFF, and HTPCs have a good use case for decent iGPUs. Same issuewith currently high dGPU prices. If I had to build a new gaming rig today, I would consider the 2400G even if I had to settled for lower graphics settings for now until this damn mining bubble pops and dGPUs become affordable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: prtskg

mohit9206

Golden Member
Jul 2, 2013
1,381
511
136
Consoles are not really cheap for gaming. It is very well illustrated by their market: their sales are basically in the richest countries of the world. It is so, because people in the poorer countries are aware that console initial cost is just the start- you also have to pay monthly for playing online, and games are more expensive/can not be pirated. And that is if we think console vs PC for the kid. Because in third world and developing countries most families will try to choose only one such expensive device for their home- and it will naturally be PC for essential tasks- facebook, banking, storing family pictures, etc. If kids want to play games- parents will either lend their phone/get a $100 tablet (free android games), or get basic gaming capability for their PC. This way is much cheaper, than also buying a console for hundreds of dollars just for kid's gaming.
In the current market situation, console is the better choice than budget gaming PC. Console games although expensive can be resold,while a PS4 costs about $250 new. Even after you consider $60 a year for online, its still cheaper and better option than PC,unless the current market situation improves of which there is no sign of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zstream

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,566
96
In the current market situation, console is the better choice than budget gaming PC. Console games although expensive can be resold,while a PS4 costs about $250 new. Even after you consider $60 a year for online, its still cheaper and better option than PC,unless the current market situation improves of which there is no sign of.
But people will own a computer anyway for other purposes? I do however admit that the lower prices of consoles are compelling, but other then the NES I never been a console fan.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
13,832
3,068
136

ASK THE COMMUNITY