And the price difference of the APU and board means having an SSD...Nothing. But you are getting 8100 performance for ~$35 less then. And that's excluding mainboard cost.
And the price difference of the APU and board means having an SSD...Nothing. But you are getting 8100 performance for ~$35 less then. And that's excluding mainboard cost.
Cheap ram? That's something i haven't of in a long while.Exactly!, The class leading igp is just a brucey bonus, slap a 1050ti on there and buy cheap ram instead.
AMD gives you a choice.
SSD is still a luxury only reserved for mid range and hi end pcs. Better to invest the extra money in bigger capacity hdd or faster gpu.And the price difference of the APU and board means having an SSD...
Nothing. But you are getting 8100 performance for ~$35 less then. And that's excluding mainboard cost.
By AMDs own OC numbers. More reasonable 3200 MHz RAM + OC, yielded about 23% improvement.
18-22 FPS + 23% = 22-27 fps at LOW. That is NOT just fine.
Considering this is a long waited upgrade to the mobile line featuring the best top of the line cpu and igp tech and is struggling to run a 3 years old game at 720p? yes its bad. If tdp is the problem they should have set the bar a little bit higher. BUT for me the IGP is the problem there, as even the dreadfull Athlon 5150 AM1 cpus can run W3 if paired with a 750TI.
If not bad its at least dissapointing.
Btw, I presume that 2200G easily achieve over 30 (probably close to 40) fps in Witcher3 in 1080p at low settings.
IGPs of 2200G/2400G are really strong, however they are seriously limited by memory bandwith.
Even if you use DDR4-3200, effectively you have less than 50 GB/s shared between CPU and GPU when low-end graphics cards usually 100 GB/s or even more alone.
I am betting your presumption will be wrong, because:
Nice trolling attempt, just because IGPs of Raven Ridge (especially 2400G) are memory bandwith limited in comparison to low-end GPUs, it doesn't mean they cannot perform at certain level.
Are you kidding me?
Just another proof of technical ignorance.
IGPs of 2200G/2400G are really strong, however they are seriously limited by memory bandwith.
Even if you use DDR4-3200, effectively you have less than 50 GB/s shared between CPU and GPU when low-end graphics cards usually 100 GB/s or even more alone.
Probably the only real solution is cheaper/economical variation of HBM2 but this will not happen in 2018 and maybe we see something like that at the end of next year or beginning of 2020.
@PeterScott
You are completely wrong about it.
I am gonna say this :
2500U <<< A12 9800
A12 9800 stock x1.5 = r5 2400g stock
r5 2400G with ddr4 and ~1550 oc scores around r7 2600x or just above rx 550
There is no upgrade path with intel, you and others keep missing this point, if you want a cheap gaming setup and plan on selling it to buy/build a new one down the road then yes you have a point, it's a toss up, 2200g Vs 8100?..I would think 8100 is much faster in gaming...(more expensive, though no overclocking).If you are buying a dGPU anyway, what real benefit is a more powerful APU/IGP?
It looks like a total tossup with an i3-8100 if you are running a dGPU:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnADhTqytLE
IMO the only point of this part on desktop is if you are going run it without a dGPU.
You are correct, G4560 /1050 combo makes a compelling choice for the here and now, with some room for upgrade.When people say u could get the 2200G and later get a dgpu down the road, that's assuming the person is ok waiting to get a dgpu later and in the meantime bear with the weak integrated graphics. If the person is ok with that then 2200G makes the most sense over the G4560.
However if the person just cannot wait and must have decent gaming performance right away, then the G4560+1050 combo cannot be beat.
It's all just a question of can you wait a few months for a better gpu or not?
Also even if the person cannot wait and ends up getting g4560+1050, its not like he will have to stick with g4560 for his entire life. Couple of years down, one could always upgrade to any kaby like i5/i7. It's not like kaby Lake cpu will disappear from the used market anytime soon.
Personally i have just about enough money to afford a 2200G and 1050ti right off the bat so I'll have great gaming performance straight away.
Sent from my Redmi 5A using Tapatalk
And multimedia. I do plan an FHD set up for Raven Ridge.Of course iGPU is not enough for most users.
Some won't even need it.
Anyway, if you are buying something to play most of esport games in FHD then APU will do just fine.
You're probably serious about this, so I'll respond in kind: up until RX 580 level of performance there won't be any measurable differences between R3 2200G and G4560 in current titles.I would like to see how an overclocked 2200g /1050 compares to g4560/1050 in a gaming/productivity shootout, I bet it is close.
2200g is more expensive, BUT offers better options for the future and better all-round performance when overclocked..(gaming remains to be seen).
Cheers, what I meant by that is Ryzen APU uses new boost algorithms and also has less cache 4mb?...so it is not directly comparable to current 4 core Ryzen CPUs, I'm not sure what effect that would have.You're probably serious about this, so I'll respond in kind: up until RX 580 level of performance there won't be any measurable differences between R3 2200G and G4560 in current titles.
Overclocking the 2200G will make zero difference with any budget video card, but when paired with a future, more expensive/powerful card, will bring a healthy lead over the G4560. Productivity performance will be overwhelmingly in favor of the AMD product.
Links to Hardware Unboxed tests to see performance levels
https://youtu.be/dFwiDlmp1hg?t=98
https://youtu.be/fITuIeLOUcQ?t=76
There's too much in favor of the 2200G to not compensate for the drop in cache size. The 2200G will be considerably higher clocked than R3 1200 (better boost or not, the base clocks speak for themselves), while the G4560 will suffer a performance penalty due to recent security patches. Expect 3-5% drop in gaming performance unless newer developments mitigate the loss or introduce similar penalties for Ryzen. Also, no more inter-CCX penalties.Cheers, what I meant by that is Ryzen APU uses new boost algorithms and also has less cache 4mb?...so it is not directly comparable to current 4 core Ryzen CPUs, I'm not sure what effect that would have.