BTW, has anyone noticed a huge fallacy in Shivansps's argument?
His/her argument can be sum up in two parts.
1.) AMD Ryzen's integrated graphics is not good enough to replace discrete graphics cards
2.) Intel Core's integrated graphics is good enough for people who don't need discrete graphics cards
Assuming that both of these arguments are true, it doesn't explain why people (who don't need discrete graphics cards) wouldn't instead get Ryzen for its better-than-"good enough" integrated graphics.
Why get "good enough" when you can get better-than-"good enough"?
The only fallacy here is you taking things out of context.
1) AMD stablished that, in every gen of APU they promoted to no end how an APU is better than low end dGPUs, this does not seem to be the case now, no idea why.
Also i said most people looking to do gaming they usually choose for GTX1050+some cheap cpu, this thing with the 1030 that people keep mentioning here just dosent exist OR they choose the entry level quad core APU, that was the 7600 now the 9600. 9700 and 9800 APU are super niches. Maybe that will change now to 2200G no idea, by price it is replacing the 9800 so well see, im just saying what is happening. And what im saying is backed up by steam survey results so i dont think its something that happens only on my country. Its a shame we cant know about the exact APU numbers.
2) As i said earlier, most people does not do any kind of heavy gaming, just multimedia, some programs to work, web browsing, maybe facebook/flash/html5 games, at the most they play LOL, and for that the A4-7300, A6-9500 and G3930/G4560 gets the job done. Thats what i said. And those are the CPU that sells the most. Thats why i rather have a 2/4 Ryzen at $50.
The next step up is the 9600 that it can almost play everything, GTA V / Overwatch and PUBG is what people looks for, and PUBG is not enterely playable on 9600, so for that they just get something with a 1050. Maybe that will change now with the 2200G, time will tell.