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

[LTC8K6]

Unless you run out of memory like in the 2GB 1030. How much difference in bandwidth between the 64-bit GDDR5 interface in that card and fast dual channel RAM in Ryzen G are we talking about?

RX550 has 128bit GDDR5, and can be had in 4gb form. But 4gb is really too much for the resolutions we'd be talking about with the 1030/550/2200G/2400G.
The "run out of video memory" line is a false argument, imo.
If DGPU prices were normal...

 

[Sane Indian]

Since more future titles are made for Direct X 12, and Direct X 12 has multi-adapter by default, the AMD 2200G + 1050 ti or RX 560 is way better than Intel i3-8100 + 1050 ti or RX 560.

Most of office/business PCs and home PCs that are used for web browsing, the iGPU of AMD 2200g is more useful for browser's hardware acceleration.

 

[LTC8K6]

Since more future titles are made for Direct X 12, and Direct X 12 has multi-adapter by default, the AMD 2200G + 1050 ti or RX 560 is way better than Intel i3-8100 + 1050 ti or RX 560.

Most of office/business PCs and home PCs that are used for web browsing, the iGPU of AMD 2200g is more useful for browser's hardware acceleration.

Multi-adapter doesn't seem to be going anywhere, though.
Hardware acceleration is fine with Intel IGP/GT1030/RX550 and the 2200G/2400G.

 

[IRobot23]

Benchmarks , maybe fake, but...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rwP3YFnzMQ

How many shader engines does VEGA11 has?

 

[IRobot23]

I would be getting faster ram for the graphics performance, not for the CPU, if I were using an IGP/APU.
Is VRAM use accurately reported in that video?
Seem to remember reports that it is not.
We know that a GT1030 will have 2GB of VRAM all to itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqGnYR_bNIg&t=31s

Check RAM usage.

 

[LTC8K6]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqGnYR_bNIg&t=31s

Check RAM usage.

Yes, it's probably inaccurate.

 

[IRobot23]

Yes, it's probably inaccurate.

what is inaccurate?

 

[LTC8K6]

what is inaccurate?

Ummm...reported ram usage?

And you left out "probably" for some reason...

 

[IRobot23]

Ummm...reported ram usage?

Nope, why?

 

[LTC8K6]

Nope, why?

Well, I don't believe it at all, for one thing.

I asked earlier about reported VRAM usage in these YT vids and someone said it was inaccurate.

 

[LTC8K6]

I would guess that 256MB is some fixed amount and the dynamic amount is not reported?

 

[IRobot23]

I would guess that 256MB is some fixed amount and the dynamic amount is not reported?

max of 256MB deticated for iGPU. It is not fixed whole the time. When iGPU reaches that amount goes on system ram. Just like gtx 970.

 

[LTC8K6]

max of 256MB deticated for iGPU. It is not fixed whole the time. When iGPU reaches that amount goes on system ram. Just like gtx 970.

Huh?

I just said the 256MB of system memory use for VRAM is probably inaccurate, you said nope, and now you agree with me? Or what?

I'm certain it's far higher than 256MB in reality.

If we only needed a 256MB video card to play like that, it would be great.

 

[IRobot23]

Are you joking?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqGnYR_bNIg&t=31s

Check RAM usage.

Did I say VRAM? ... Of course...

 

[LTC8K6]

Are you joking?



Did I say VRAM? ... Of course...

What else would we be talking about?

You couldn't have pointed that out earlier?

Crikey!

Why don't we both shut up until independent reviews come out, and then I can tell you how wrong you were.

 

[IRobot23]

What else would we be talking about?

You couldn't have pointed that out earlier?

Crikey!

Why don't we both shut up until independent reviews come out, and then I can tell you how wrong you were.

What? I did I said check RAM usage. As you can see always below 7GB.

It is reporting correctly.

 

[LTC8K6]

What? I did I said check RAM usage. As you can see always below 7GB.

I give up... You win.

 

[IRobot23]

I give up... You win.

No, you won already.

You didn't even check or read yet you are replying me.

Beside that, I don't even know what are you talking about.

 

[BSim500]

Nope, why?

iGPU virtual "VRAM" usage (as seen in Rivatuner OSD) can be seriously misleading. Quite often you're just looking at just the "window" itself (256MB buffer) rather than counting both the window + what's through the window (256MB buffer + whatever more is being used in "non VRAM RAM" as an overflow but because of that never gets shown as "technically VRAM"). That's simply how Rivatuner often reports shared iGPU memory. A fixed 256MB "VRAM" size looks impressive, but doesn't really show what's happening. In cases like this, it's basically showing 256MB of RAM as "VRAM" and the other 768MB / 1792MB used in 1-2GB games eats into system RAM and appears as that rather than "VRAM". For example (8GB rig):-

- dGPU = In a game that used 2GB VRAM + 5GB system RAM used that would = 3GB of 8GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 256MB VRAM buffer = It would show 256MB "VRAM" used + 6.75GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 7.75GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 1GB VRAM buffer = It would show 1GB "VRAM" used + 6GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 7GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 2GB VRAM buffer = It would show 2GB "VRAM" used + 5GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 6GB system RAM free.

It's like putting a pagefile onto a RAM-Disk in an 8GB rig - whether you create a 4GB Pagefile on a 4GB RAM Disk leaving only 4GB System RAM, or just a 256MB pagefile leaving 7.75GB, in both cases, no matter what the figures say all you're ultimately doing is caching RAM into RAM. In the context of this thread, it doesn't mean that in an 8GB rig, a game which is using 2GB VRAM arranged into 256MB "VRAM" and 1.75GB "overflow" RAM will magically have 7.75GB free instead of 6GB free as actual system RAM available for programs that isn't being used for GFX, or even appearing to use "9.75GB" of 8GB RAM installed. The allocated vs actually used "VRAM" bit is just being misreported.

 

[IRobot23]

iGPU virtual "VRAM" usage (as seen in Rivatuner OSD) can be seriously misleading. Quite often you're just looking at just the "window" itself (256MB buffer) rather than counting both the window + what's through the window (256MB buffer + whatever more is being used in "non VRAM RAM" as an overflow but because of that never gets shown as "technically VRAM"). That's simply how Rivatuner often reports shared iGPU memory. A fixed 256MB "VRAM" size looks impressive, but doesn't really show what's happening. In cases like this, it's basically showing 256MB of RAM as "VRAM" and the other 768MB / 1792MB used in 1-2GB games eats into system RAM and appears as that rather than "VRAM". For example (8GB rig):-

- dGPU = In a game that used 2GB VRAM + 5GB system RAM used that would = 3GB of 8GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 256MB VRAM buffer = It would show 256MB "VRAM" used + 6.75GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 7.75GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 1GB VRAM buffer = It would show 1GB "VRAM" used + 6GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 7GB system RAM free.

- iGPU with forced 2GB VRAM buffer = It would show 2GB "VRAM" used + 5GB system RAM used = 1.0GB of 6GB system RAM free.

It's like putting a pagefile onto a RAM-Disk in an 8GB rig - whether you create a 4GB Pagefile on a 4GB RAM Disk leaving only 4GB System RAM, or just a 256MB pagefile leaving 7.75GB, in both cases, no matter what the figures say all you're ultimately doing is caching RAM into RAM. In the context of this thread, it doesn't mean that in an 8GB rig, a game which is using 2GB VRAM arranged into 256MB "VRAM" and 1.75GB "overflow" RAM will magically have 7.75GB free instead of 6GB free as actual system RAM available for programs that isn't being used for GFX, or even appearing to use "9.75GB" of 8GB RAM installed. The allocated vs actually used "VRAM" bit is just being misreported.

If AMD sets 256MB buffer in driver, it doesn't that "riva tuner" is lying. And actually it doesn't matter my point was that 8GB of System ram should be more than enough.

Yes, you guys are trying to say that iGPu is taking more ram? I do understand that and I did pointed it out.

Probably what you missed is that he commented for both videos, which got me confusing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma-XCG9dUHs
He also mentioned that riva is probably "lying".

 

[USER8000]

If AMD sets 256MB buffer in driver, it doesn't that "riva tuner" is lying. And actually it doesn't matter my point was that 8GB of System ram should be more than enough.

Yes, you guys are trying to say that iGPu is taking more ram? I do understand that and I did pointed it out.

Its is enough system RAM,as I have another system at home running an older AMD APU with 8GB of system RAM. The system allocated VRAM during normal operation is only a few hundred megabytes anyway out of the total amount,so its not a huge amount. If the system were to require more VRAM,that will only be relevant when gaming and the Intel integrated graphics is still slower.

 

[IRobot23]

Its is,as I have another system at home running an older AMD APU with 8GB of system RAM. The system allocated RAM during normal operation is only a few hundred MB anyway,so its not a huge amount. If the system were to require more VRAM,that will only happen when gaming and the Intel integrated graphics is still slower.

This is where pagefile kicks in.

 

[krumme]

It's a good thing feelings don't matter.
The Intel option is going to require a DGPU, thus price is always the area of concern.
AMD APUs have always been well out in front of Intel's IGPs.
That has been the case for a long time, and it will be the case for the foreseeable future.

Intel's only "victory" against AMD APUs was IP6200 graphics on Broadwell DT, which Intel never did again for whatever reason.
Those had 48EUs along with 128mb of EDRAM L4 cache.

That should give an idea of what Intel would need to keep up with the 2200/2400G APUs.

Ok. I perfectly take your words for it. No probs.

Btw i have gamed a lot on intel igpu and still a lot of the 15w tdp laptops in the house is used for that. Since intel 950 series before sb 3000. I took my turn.
Heck what do you game on in the run if there is nothing else. I think we are next to half a billion in the world doing so.
So i simply dont understand this talk about dgpu. Different solutions imo. No way is a 1030 plus 4c intel solution competing with this. Be it laptop or desktop. For tdp or cost reasons. As said i took my turn. If i can get 100% better igp perf just by having another label i am all for it.

 

[LTC8K6]

Its is enough system RAM,as I have another system at home running an older AMD APU with 8GB of system RAM. The system allocated VRAM during normal operation is only a few hundred megabytes anyway out of the total amount,so its not a huge amount. If the system were to require more VRAM,that will only be relevant when gaming and the Intel integrated graphics is still slower.

But the comparison is not really to Intel's IGP, but to an Intel chip with a 2GB DGPU such as RX550 or GT1030.

 

[USER8000]

But the comparison is not really to Intel's IGP, but to an Intel chip with a 2GB DGPU such as RX550 or GT1030.

In normal usage,the integrated graphics is not going to use much VRAM,just like the Intel integrated graphics so it means nothing. I had a Core i3 2100 and an AMD APU system. Running integrated graphics on both,or with something like a GTX660TI,I could not tell the difference at all when it come to web browsing with 8GB of RAM,as the hit is tiny.

When it comes to gaming, a bit less system RAM is not going to make much difference in a game,with a low end card. The difference between a low end card and a integrated graphics chip,will be more dependent on memory bandwidth and the GPU core itself.

If it made such a difference,then a GT710 4GB should always been faster than a 2400G.

The 2200G is still going to destroy the Core i3 8100 and any similarly priced Intel chip in graphics performance,and looking at the expected pricing,a G4560 and GT1030 will cost more:

http://www.microcenter.com/product/485530/pentium_g4560_kaby_lake_350ghz_lga_1151_boxed_processor
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125972&cm_re=gt1030-_-14-125-972-_-Product

The 2200G is $99,and I had a quick look at US retailers,and the Intel combo is over $150. The G4560 is not in stock on Newegg or Amazon.

In the UK the 2200G should technically be roughly £85,a G4560 and GT1030 is £120:

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/int...hread-35ghz-3mb-cache-1050mhz-gpu-54w-cpu-box
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/pal...phics-card-384-core-1227mhz-gpu-1468mhz-boost

So you are looking at a 40% or more price premium.