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

[LTC8K6]

My guess? L3 cache. 1300X has 8MB, and 1500X 16MB compared with the 2400G/2200G's 4MB L3. The low-end Summit Ridge are salvage dies, so it makes sense to keep them around for that purpose rather then throwing away semi-working dies. Zeppelin is likely still very much in production for Epyc.

That said, I can see why the 1200 and 1400 had to go. They just don't have the frequency to keep up with the Raven dies.



Only good value? The 2200G is unbelievable value. $99 for a modern 3.7GHz quad core* with a 512SP Vega IGP is absolutely mindblowing. Intel's Pentium/Celeron line-up just got obsoleted overnight.

If AMD really want to drive this home, they could release a budget 2C/4T with 256/384SP for ~$59...

*modern as in got AVX2 extensions. None of that stupid Intel instruction set segmentation.

i3's do AVX2 as well, going back to Haswell.
AVX seems to come with a performance hit though, mostly from increasing the CPU temps.

 

[PingSpike]

But that's a catchy name for SSD caching for HDDs.

If you say so!

 

[PingSpike]

I'm pretty interested in the details of their Fuzedrive implementation. And selling it as a $20 piece of software is the right move regardless instead of gating it behind hardware tiers like Intel does with SRT.

 

[cbn]

I'm pretty interested in the details of their Fuzedrive implementation. And selling it as a $20 piece of software is the right move regardless instead of gating it behind hardware tiers like Intel does with SRT.

Yes, that software looks very interesting.

One question I still have is can it be used with Ryzen laptops?

 

[nathanddrews]

The 2200G is unbelievable value. $99 for a modern 3.7GHz quad core* with a 512SP Vega IGP is absolutely mindblowing. Intel's Pentium/Celeron line-up just got obsoleted overnight.

Dare I say most of the NUC/HTPC line-up, too. A Pico/Mini-ITX build around a 2200G would be a stellar compact HTPC/esports/emulation box, for rock-bottom pricing. Assuming motherboard support of HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 (HDMI 2.1 even, perhaps?) and/or DP1.4, it is very exciting! Not to mention FreeSync 2 support for when the IGP can't maintain solid frames.

$99 2200G
$60 ITX B350-esque motherboard
$100 for SSD of sufficient size
$40 ITX case w/PSU
$1,300 RAM

Not bad!

 

[ao_ika_red]

i3's do AVX2 as well, going back to Haswell.
AVX seems to come with a performance hit though, mostly from increasing the CPU temps.

Not with their pentiums though. G4560 only supports SSE 4.2 without AVX2 capability. If AMD could do cheaper version of 2200G, that would be the fastest AVX2 capable cpu (in its price range) on the market.

Well, my 845 is also AVX2 capable (and it's cheap as dirt), but only just.

 

[LTC8K6]

Can you mine with them? I hope not...

 

[maddie]

The one with HBM2 stack?

Im talking about this one part. It can be either monolithic APU with HBM2, or dGPU with HBM2.

This reminds me of last year when so many belittled the idea of this very mixture of HBM2. Very few of us were positive to the possibility. Years before this would or could happen was the popular cry. Now Intel for sure and almost certainly AMD also, will have exactly such products and some of those same naysayers have become the new found experts.

 

[whm1974]

This reminds me of last year when so many belittled the idea of this very mixture of HBM2. Very few of us were positive to the possibility. Years before this would or could happen was the popular cry. Now Intel for sure and almost certainly AMD also, will have exactly such products and some of those same naysayers have become the new found experts.

Don't those setups run kind of hot? last I heard they have 100w TDP.

 

[maddie]

Some say that and I can't understand why. HBM2 module supposedly under 2W power. Where is the extra heat coming from?

 

[sirmo]

Inferior for what? Video rendering? Content creation? I'm looking at it from a gamers perspective, yes dual core isn't ideal in 2018 but 2C/4T is enough for 60fps when paired with a fast enough GPU, but the Vega 11 iGPU won't hit 60fps @ 1080P unless you run eSports titles.
In isolation, these APUs are good value, but when you take into account 16GB of DDR4-3200 or better (in order to feed the iGPU sufficient bandwith) the costs quickly escalate.

If you want max frames for your buck, these APUs aren't it. For example, if a friend or relative came to me and said, build me something for $300 that can run games well at 1080P, what would I build them? Either a used Sandy/Ivy Bridge era i7 plus a GTX 1050 or better, or a Pentium + GTX 1050 or better if they *must* build something new, even though the older i7s would provide better gaming performance.

Even from a pure gaming perspective, I would not be getting a dual core in 2018.

You would be getting a dead end platform and sacrificing a lot just so you can max your GPU while still paying more. I think these little APUs make a perfect entry. The person building the computer can easily upgrade the GPU or CPU down the road with minimal waste of money. And they should get playable experience, with FreeSync it will be surprisingly ok.

If they go with Gxxx dual core + 1050.. if they upgrade the GPU they have to sell the 1050 and the computer will be CPU bottlenecked. And god help you if you ever try to transcode some video for your tablet or a phone.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

i3's do AVX2 as well, going back to Haswell.
AVX seems to come with a performance hit though, mostly from increasing the CPU temps.

i3's have been 2C/4T until CL. Getting 4 real cores have required getting at least an i5 until very recently*. That option is now available at $99, and features a superior IGP. Good times.

*and to use a CL i3 currently requires a Z370 board too...

Not with their pentiums though. G4560 only supports SSE 4.2 without AVX2 capability. If AMD could do cheaper version of 2200G, that would be the fastest AVX2 capable cpu (in its price range) on the market.

Well, my 845 is also AVX2 capable (and it's cheap as dirt), but only just.

Carrizo/Bristol Ridge are certainly AVX2 capable, and that's about it. They can execute it, but the implementation is too slow for it to be actually useful.

 

[SPBHM]

Even from a pure gaming perspective, I would not be getting a dual core in 2018.

You would be getting a dead end platform and sacrificing a lot just so you can max your GPU while still paying more. I think these little APUs make a perfect entry. The person building the computer can easily upgrade the GPU or CPU down the road with minimal waste of money. And they should get playable experience, with FreeSync it will be surprisingly ok.

If they go with Gxxx dual core + 1050.. if they upgrade the GPU they have to sell the 1050 and the computer will be CPU bottlenecked. And god help you if you ever try to transcode some video for your tablet or a phone.

2c/4t looks good enough for a GTX 1050 in this game, you are going to aim at 30FPS locked with lower end cards (like the consoles) and not 60, and with the APUs IGPs in this game and their 50GB/s ram or less.... well, good luck,
also it might be possible to reduce level of detail, distance settings to decrease the CPU load without noticing much of a visual difference.

G4560 + GTX 1050 is far far better for gaming that these APUs, no doubt.



the arguments against the G4560 platform and future upgrades requiring more CPU are valid, but for now it's a far better gaming combo, because the APUs are still very slow, 11 CUs are not really that impressive, and the memory bandwidth is just too limited.

but I really like the 2200G, because the price makes it a lot more compelling, the 2400G I find more difficult to justify for IGP use.

it would be interesting to see max OC 2200G vs 2400G in terms of IGP perf, because both are still going to be very memory bandwidth limited anyway.

 

[sirmo]

2c/4t looks good enough for a GTX 1050 in this game, you are going to aim at 30FPS locked with lower end cards (like the consoles) and not 60, and with the APUs IGPs in this game and their 50GB/s ram or less.... well, good luck,
also it might be possible to reduce level of detail, distance settings to decrease the CPU load without noticing much of a visual difference.

G4560 + GTX 1050 is far far better for gaming that these APUs, no doubt.



the arguments against the G4560 platform and future upgrades requiring more CPU are valid, but for now it's a far better gaming combo, because the APUs are still very slow, 11 CUs are not really that impressive, and the memory bandwidth is just too limited.

Well I just showed you that dual cores are problematic with newer games. A trend that will no doubt continue. Especially now that the i5 baseline is 6 cores. And that you can get a 6 core 12 thread CPU from AMD for less than $200. If that game is struggling to break 30fps with a Titan XP at 720p than I wonder how well it runs on that dual core with a much weaker GPU. What about a dual core with a browser playing a Twitch stream in the background?

The way I see it if you're going to build yourself a first PC, you are doing it because of the choice and the ability to upgrade components on your PC yourself. That's the whole point of DIY PC building, otherwise just get a pre-built, console or a gaming laptop. Building a crippled dead end system around Gxxx dual cores is the exact antithesis to what PCMR is all about. This $99 or $169 APU is a great entry point into PCMR imho.

 

[SPBHM]

this is a single game on ultra settings (which is likely to also increase CPU load in a game like this and you can and will turn it down a bit with slower GPUs) with a Titan XP,
I remember the same arguments 5 years ago against the i3s because "Crysis 3 Welcome to the Jungle" ran poorly, yet dual core + HT is still relevant for (budget) gaming,

the consoles and their week CPUs are still the same and are kind of what defines the baseline experience, so I don't see the G4560 and DC i3s dying just yet for budget gamers.

4560 + 1050 is a far more capable DIY gaming combination than any of these APUs it's maximizing your FPS/$ as well as you can, by a big margin, that is very clear, when even the $170 APU with DDR4 3600 and OCed to the limit is barely equal to a RX 550 ( which is around half of a GTX 1050) on 3dmark.

 

[PhonakV30]

Dare I say most of the NUC/HTPC line-up, too. A Pico/Mini-ITX build around a 2200G would be a stellar compact HTPC/esports/emulation box, for rock-bottom pricing. Assuming motherboard support of HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 (HDMI 2.1 even, perhaps?) and/or DP1.4, it is very exciting! Not to mention FreeSync 2 support for when the IGP can't maintain solid frames.

$99 2200G
$60 ITX B350-esque motherboard
$100 for SSD of sufficient size
$40 ITX case w/PSU
$1,300 RAM

Not bad!

$1300 Memory Kits? Whoa.....

 

[whm1974]

$1300 Memory Kits? Whoa.....

Is that 64GB of 3200Mhz RAM? If I was spending that much on memory, I wouldn't be using such a low end CPU to begin with.

 

[sirmo]

this is a single game on ultra settings (which is likely to also increase CPU load in a game like this and you can and will turn it down a bit with slower GPUs) with a Titan XP,
I remember the same arguments 5 years ago against the i3s because "Crysis 3 Welcome to the Jungle" ran poorly, yet dual core + HT is still relevant for (budget) gaming,

the consoles and their week CPUs are still the same and are kind of what defines the baseline experience, so I don't see the G4560 and DC i3s dying just yet for budget gamers.

4560 + 1050 is a far more capable DIY gaming combination than any of these APUs it's maximizing your FPS/$ as well as you can, by a big margin, that is very clear, when even the $170 APU with DDR4 3600 and OCed to the limit is barely equal to a RX 550 ( which is around half of a GTX 1050) on 3dmark.

But you're paying $120 more for a crippled system.

Instead, you can buy a $99 APU.. overclock it.. it will run Esports titles fine at tweaked settings. If you're not happy with the performance you can always buy a dGPU and now you have a faster CPU and a faster GPU than the alternative. And you spent $25 more for 2 real cores, and an unlocked CPU.

So I really fail to see how G4560 is better.

Bottom line is: "is a $99 2200G better than the $75 G4560.. " all day long it is. Whichever way you look at it.

It has an iGPU you can play games on, it's a quad core, you can OC it. AM4 is a much better platform you can upgrade. It's a no brainer.

 

[sirmo]

This reminds me of last year when so many belittled the idea of this very mixture of HBM2. Very few of us were positive to the possibility. Years before this would or could happen was the popular cry. Now Intel for sure and almost certainly AMD also, will have exactly such products and some of those same naysayers have become the new found experts.

Yup, I was the only one pretty much who said HBM2 based APU was a good idea. Case in point: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/if-the-zen-apu-with-hbm2-comes-out.2494388/#post-38625384

And pretty much everyone argued against me saying it was a dumb idea: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/amd-raven-ridge-zen-apu-thread.2479296/page-12#post-38472922

I want my internet points now.

 

[Qwertilot]

I think I've been saying its a nice idea in theory but not expecting AMD to be able to actually do it. So kind of right as well

Well worth waiting to see how well it does though. Intel's marketing slides in recent times have had a real tendency to be very optimistic.

 

[ao_ika_red]

Carrizo/Bristol Ridge are certainly AVX2 capable, and that's about it. They can execute it, but the implementation is too slow for it to be actually useful.

Almost grinding to a halt. It's like better there than nothing at all.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I think you'll find the Ryzen 5 2400G will be a very popular cpu imo. Unlocked, decent clock speeds, and graphics performance that is acceptable for casual gaming. I think people forget that a lot of users are just casual gamers. They're quite happy for the game to auto detect their performance and play at medium settings at 1080p.

The only problem with them is that I see a lot of pc stores will cut corners and ship them with 2400mhz ram thereby crippling their performance.

Am wondering if Apple may use this cpu on their cheaper imacs, seems to fit exactly what they need.

 

[nathanddrews]

$1300 Memory Kits? Whoa.....

Is that 64GB of 3200Mhz RAM? If I was spending that much on memory, I wouldn't be using such a low end CPU to begin with.

I hope it was obvious that I was joking about absurd RAM prices, but yeah, seems impossible to build a truly budget system with RAM prices so high.

 

[whm1974]

I hope it was obvious that I was joking about absurd RAM prices, but yeah, seems impossible to build a truly budget system with RAM prices so high.

I should have realized that you were joking about memory prices, my bad. But you are right.

 

[sirmo]

RAM prices are seriously out of whack.. I am going to build a Mini ITX PC for a relative using the 2200g and 2x4Gb RAM as soon as it becomes available. And see how it actually does. It's replacing an old Mac Mini running on a C2D.. so it will be a big upgrade.