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.why are people discussing old i5s? 8400 is 6c/6t, not 4c/4t
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.
Wow, that's cheaper than I thought, I thought we would see close to a straight dollar ~ currency conversion.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.
Which other 4c/8t CPU w/iGPU are you comparing it to for price? Cheapest Intel I can find is ~$290.
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....
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....
Why do you keep using these bogus arguments?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.
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.
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.
It's called an NDA... something that adults in this industry deal with.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...
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.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.
It's called an NDA... something that adults in this industry deal with.
nvmwhy are people discussing old i5s? 8400 is 6c/6t, not 4c/4t
I'm thinking by the time AMD reaches 10nm or 7nm process, that they should release a 6C/12T APU.Because they are desperate to make the 2400 appear a good value.
No, I said i5 6/6 (i5 8400), as well as AMD 6/12 (1600) gives better cpu performance than AMD 4/8.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 )
Yet for 51 pages everybody only focuses on games because the igpu of the APU is stronger......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?
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.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...
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....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...
Don't you know that there is an alternate fantasy world populated by fairies and Elves where this is reality?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...
Why do you keep using these bogus arguments?
Honest question, no offense intended.
Don't you know that there is an alternate fantasy world populated by fairies and Elves where this is reality?