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

[SPBHM]

why are people discussing old i5s? 8400 is 6c/6t, not 4c/4t

 

[french toast]

why are people discussing old i5s? 8400 is 6c/6t, not 4c/4t

Price for one, second ; the discussion was about whether 2400g was good value or not...some people are suggesting that the extra threads, clocks, gpu perf is not worth the extra $70 over 2200g.
Frozen? Said something like intel i5 4/4 beats AMD 4/8...(so 2400g loses on cpu but bests intel on gpu..so not worth it? or something..)..

As I typed that out I realised this conversation is getting convoluted and quite ridiculous.
Competition is actually pretty good sub 200$ from both AMD and Intel, with AMD APUs the market leader and intel about 15% better gaming CPU wise.(so i3 8100 and i5 8400 are worth spending a bit more on to pair up with a dgpu - if you want best FPS )

 

[USER8000]

Exactly, what a bogus comparison.
A quick Search for prices in my country I get.
1500x = £136.
7600k = £181.
That's not taking into consideration motherboards or coolers, upgradability, or even using other apps to compare.
A better comparison in price, tdp count is i5 7400..which retails for the same price where i live £136.
https://youtu.be/QWTBaasy2uU
At stock speeds 1500x is clearly faster in gaming and much faster all round...and it can be overclocked which i5 can't.
(i3 8100 is much better value than both in pure price/perf).

On topic, 2400g is excellent value.

Amazon Spain have listings for the 2200G and 2400G:

https://www.amazon.es/AMD-Ryzen-220...F8&qid=1518265577&sr=8-1&keywords=2200G+RYZEN
https://www.amazon.es/AMD-Ryzen-240...8&qid=1518265583&sr=8-1&keywords=2400G++RYZEN

Including the 21% tax they have,prices are £85 and £135.

 

[french toast]

Amazon Spain have listings for the 2200G and 2400G:

https://www.amazon.es/AMD-Ryzen-220...F8&qid=1518265577&sr=8-1&keywords=2200G+RYZEN
https://www.amazon.es/AMD-Ryzen-240...8&qid=1518265583&sr=8-1&keywords=2400G++RYZEN

Including the 21% tax they have,prices are £85 and £135.

Wow, that's cheaper than I thought, I thought we would see close to a straight dollar ~ currency conversion.
So in UK, currently intel can't hope to compete with that as a package, let's see what overclocking is like first, AMD got 4.2ghz on wraith, somebody leaked 4.5ghz yesterday...but could be fake...or could be real but on water?

Edit; UK pricing (quick Google shopping check)
i5-8400...£161.
i5-7400...£136.
i3-8100...£102.
Raven ridge slots in nicely there and looks competitive, like I said let's look at overclocking first.

 

[Abwx]

Pricing is very good consumer wise, at 96/153€.

You could barely get an i3 for the former price no that long ago and no valuable i5 for the latter one, i wont even put the GPU in the equation, but still, we are told by some usual suspects that the 2400G is pricey....

 

[Shivansps]

Which other 4c/8t CPU w/iGPU are you comparing it to for price? Cheapest Intel I can find is ~$290.

Im only comparing to AMD products because as i said earlier Intel is yet to fully launch the 8th gen lineup, until they fix that mess i cant compare anything, but i would guess if we talk about gaming with the IGP there is no contest as always, well maybe except for the 5th gen but im not sure if that counts.

It will fully depend on the 2400G performance over 2200G.

 

[Peter Watts]

Why the heck aren´t people leaking benchmarks before they are allowed to by AMD? Is AMD spying on them or what? They all can anonymously leak if they want... They won´t know who dun it...

Now we all have to wait till monday and keep up the mudslinging....

 

[Shivansps]

Pricing is very good consumer wise, at 96/153€.

You could barely get an i3 for the former price no that long ago and no valuable i5 for the latter one, i wont even put the GPU in the equation, but still, we are told by some usual suspects that the 2400G is pricey....

Considering you actually know the performance of a 4MB L3 Ryzen sharing memory with the IGP, i dont. And im not sure why everyone attempts to bring intel intro this, that is just some kind of justification at all cost going on.

IF SMT is the only real gain in 2200G vs 2400G, $70 dosent seem a bit too much to you?, at those price points $70 is a lot of money. Once i have the CPU numbers vs R5 1400 and GPU numbers vs 2200G i can say this sure sure. But no now, and neither should you.

 

[Shivansps]

Why the heck aren´t people leaking benchmarks before they are allowed to by AMD? Is AMD spying on them or what? They all can anonymously leak if they want... They won´t know who dun it...

Now we all have to wait till monday and keep up the mudslinging....

Thats strange, and even more strange because it looks like the launch is worldwide, from what i hear i may have these APU to play with the next week, what is really strange, generally we need to wait a month or so untill new stuff start reaching here.

 

[french toast]

Considering you actually know the performance of a 4MB L3 Ryzen sharing memory with the IGP, i dont. And im not sure why everyone attempts to bring intel intro this, that is just some kind of justification at all cost going on.

IF SMT is the only real gain in 2200G vs 2400G, $70 dosent seem a bit too much to you?, at those price points $70 is a lot of money. Once i have the CPU numbers vs R5 1400 and GPU numbers vs 2200G i can say this sure sure. But no now, and neither should you.

Why do you keep using these bogus arguments?
Honest question, no offense intended.

 

[Abwx]

Considering you actually know the performance of a 4MB L3 Ryzen sharing memory with the IGP, i dont. And im not sure why everyone attempts to bring intel intro this, that is just some kind of justification at all cost going on..

To know if something is competitive it has forcibly to be compared to the competing solutions, and in this first glance it s highly competitive..

IF SMT is the only real gain in 2200G vs 2400G, $70 dosent seem a bit too much to you?, at those price points $70 is a lot of money. Once i have the CPU numbers vs R5 1400 and GPU numbers vs 2200G i can say this sure sure. But no now, and neither should you.

Here we are, so your point is that AMD are not competitive with themslves considering their two APUs offering...

As said there s 50% perf delta between the 2200G and 2400G, SMT is very effcient in thoses CPUs and in this case, along with 100MHz advantage, that s the same as a 4C/4T to 6C/6T comparison.

Besides, and since you build AIOs, the 2400G is much more versatile for custom settings, both can be set at 45W but the 2400G GPU can be dowclocked considerably and still retain the same throughput as the 2200G s 8 CUs but at 40% lower power, likewise both CPUs can be set to 35W and stil have about 80% of the stock performance.

Finaly i get that your opinion is one of an OEM, not of a regular consumer, and as such certainly that you would prefer locked 2200G/2400G versions at about 3GHz and something like 80/130$ pricing...

 

[Peter Watts]

Thats strange, and even more strange because it looks like the launch is worldwide, from what i hear i may have these APU to play with the next week, what is really strange, generally we need to wait a month or so untill new stuff start reaching here.

A lot of youtubers/websites already got the press-kits a few days ago, but they are all collectively waiting till Monday/Tuesday to release their benchmarks/analysis... Because well AMD has got to give the green-light first... What´s the point of that? Well guess they are all afraid to leak something anonymously on the web lol...

 

[VirtualLarry]

A lot of youtubers/websites already got the press-kits a few days ago, but they are all collectively waiting till Monday/Tuesday to release their benchmarks/analysis... Because well AMD has got to give the green-light first... What´s the point of that? Well guess they are all afraid to leak something anonymously on the web lol...

It's called an NDA... something that adults in this industry deal with.

 

[frozentundra123456]

According to this logic no other CPU in the world makes sense except for the 2200G. We simply set aside customer use cases, form factors... anything really, and declare that for the CPU and GPU performance that 2200G puts on the table, every other chip is not worth the money.

What cracks me up the most is we don't even have reviews yet. Can't wait for Monday, at least then any criticism will be standing on facts, not agendas.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth. I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. Let me spell it out for you. The 2200 is the best value if one wants to game on the igpu. The i5 8400 and 1600 are better values if one wants to add an even moderately powerful discrete card, or wants more cpu performance than 4/4.

 

[Peter Watts]

It's called an NDA... something that adults in this industry deal with.

I am an adult too but i break rules from time to time... Am i not worthy?

 

[frozentundra123456]

why are people discussing old i5s? 8400 is 6c/6t, not 4c/4t

nvm

 

[whm1974]

Because they are desperate to make the 2400 appear a good value.

I'm thinking by the time AMD reaches 10nm or 7nm process, that they should release a 6C/12T APU.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Price for one, second ; the discussion was about whether 2400g was good value or not...some people are suggesting that the extra threads, clocks, gpu perf is not worth the extra $70 over 2200g.
Frozen? Said something like intel i5 4/4 beats AMD 4/8...(so 2400g loses on cpu but bests intel on gpu..so not worth it? or something..)..

As I typed that out I realised this conversation is getting convoluted and quite ridiculous.
Competition is actually pretty good sub 200$ from both AMD and Intel, with AMD APUs the market leader and intel about 15% better gaming CPU wise.(so i3 8100 and i5 8400 are worth spending a bit more on to pair up with a dgpu - if you want best FPS )

No, I said i5 6/6 (i5 8400), as well as AMD 6/12 (1600) gives better cpu performance than AMD 4/8.

 

[TheELF]

CPU performance is measured in more than games. And there are applications that it would make a more noticeable difference than a few FPS.

And what's the MSRP of the 7600K? $250, I believe? The 1500X is $200, I think? We're talking about a $170 APU. What's the RAM speed used? What's the clocks?

Yet for 51 pages everybody only focuses on games because the igpu of the APU is stronger......
Also the point of the pic/video is 4 plain cores at~3.8-4Ghz against 4c/8t at around 3.5Ghz,and yes the i5 wins.
Edit:
Also the i3-8100 has a Recommended Customer Price of $117.00 and is 4 plain cores at 3.6Ghz, with $60 cheaper you will get the same performance in highly threaded games while the i3 will crush the APU outright in less threaded ones...

 

[french toast]

Yet for 51 pages everybody only focuses on games because the igpu of the APU is stronger......
Also the point of the pic/video is 4 plain cores at~3.8-4Ghz against 4c/8t at around 3.5Ghz,and yes the i5 wins.
Edit:
Also the i3-8100 has a Recommended Customer Price of $117.00 and is 4 plain cores at 3.6Ghz, with $60 cheaper you will get the same performance in highly threaded games while the i3 will crush the APU outright in less threaded ones...

Of course 4 much faster threads will best 8 slower ones in most games, that is not exactly news is it?..7600k that you compared is clocked at 4.2ghz ST ...(not 3.8/4.0) but i3 8100 is not clocked at 4.2GHz is it? (3.6, locked)..its also not overclock-able either.
Both AMD APUs are overclock-able, more than likely able to hit > 4ghz on the bundled stock cooler...
I would love to see that showdown...the cheaper 2200g overclocked Vs the more expensive i3 8100...3.6ghz 4/4 Vs 4.0ghz 4/4.... probably quite close on 3200mhz ram.

Overclock a 2400G and it will wipe the floor with an i3..in 80% of scenarios I'm sure.
That's just CPU, GPU we already know the answer to that one.

(For years intel fanbois have been countering arguements with the superior overclocking of intel chips...with valid reason, shoe is on the other foot now.)

Edit;.
The comparison can already be looked at...i3 8100 Vs 1300x @ 4ghz...3000mhz ddr4.
https://youtu.be/AuVBk_8T8LI
As I thought, close but the 1300x is marginally better across the board.
Now it is not apples to apples, 1300x has twice the L3, on the other hand 2200G has slightly revised uarch and process (very minimal)..it might clock a little higher?

Nevertheless point proven, unless reviews reveal a massive shock, there is no reason to buy a i3 8100...2200g is better value and likely better performing all round....2400g looks untouchable, nothing near it gets close.

 

[Abwx]

Also the i3-8100 has a Recommended Customer Price of $117.00 and is 4 plain cores at 3.6Ghz, with $60 cheaper you will get the same performance in highly threaded games while the i3 will crush the APU outright in less threaded ones...

A 3.5 R5 1500X is about on par on games with a 3.8 4C/4T i5 7500 but for some reason a 3.6 i3 8100 should be better than a 3.6 2400G, lol....

https://www.hardware.fr/articles/965-3/performances-jeux-3d.html

Not that much threaded games at HFR, btw...

 

[maddie]

A 3.5 R5 1500X is about on par on games with a 3.8 4C/4T i5 7500 but for some reason a 3.6 i3 8100 should be better than a 3.6 2400G, lol....

https://www.hardware.fr/articles/965-3/performances-jeux-3d.html

Not that much threaded games at HFR, btw...

Don't you know that there is an alternate fantasy world populated by fairies and Elves where this is reality?

 

[Shivansps]

Why do you keep using these bogus arguments?
Honest question, no offense intended.

I dont think SMT alone is worth paying $70 more than the 2200G, i dont think there is anything bogus with that, it is a very subjective thing, and i say this for reasons ive already explained: I dont belive 3 extra CU and 150 mhz will make much of a diference on an already memory constrained IGP, that is not bogus either.
We are talking about budget build and $70 is a significant amount of money, same reason you are not going to see anyone recomending to spend 100% more money on a 8700K instead of a 8400 on a budget dgpu build just for HT and oc.

On two days we will know for sure, there is no point in discussing this when we have no numbers to back up either posicion, i do belive 2200G and 2400G overall perf will be so close with each other that is not going to worth paying the extra for the 2400G and so SMT will be the big selling point of the 2400G, it is as simple as that, i might be wrong, well see. I dont understand the need for discussing over this.

 

[IEC]

i5 and Ryzen 5 aren't really comparable options. People shopping for a 2400G or 2200G are the ones who would use a i3/R3 or Pentium/Celeron in their builds - it's a completely different market segment than the mid range, and extremely price sensitive.

 

[Abwx]

Don't you know that there is an alternate fantasy world populated by fairies and Elves where this is reality?

Indeed, and may i add that it s a world where iGPUs do not exist at all..?.