• Hey there Guest! This holiday season you have a chance to win some cool AnandTech swag! Check out “The Holiday Hotlist” giveaway, which you can find here.

Athlon 200GE - the ultimate great place-holder CPU?

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,261
42
126
Larry the 2200g petty much runs a at around 3850mhz act even on an a320 check tje vídeo i posted a few pages back of a 2200g running games.
 

Abwx

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2011
8,710
11
126
(A 4C/4T Zen, at a lower clock speed, can match an 8-core FX running at 4Ghz, in MT performance.)

.
It wont, FTR Piledriver 8C does 640pts in CB R15 while a R3 1200 would need to be clocked at 4.1GHz to get this score, overall the FX8350 is 30% faster in MT than the lower clocked R3, and not only in Cinebench, in 7ZIP it s 60% faster, 25% in X264, 50% in Stockfish and so on...
 

Jan Olšan

Senior member
Jan 12, 2017
255
4
76
Has anybody tried what happens if you install the 200GE into a motherboard with insufficiently new BIOS? I expected the Athlon to run with the bioses required by 2200G and 2400G, but apparently new ones are required, usually released in august. Most mobos in etail likely wouldn't support the chip out of the box if that is the case.

Anybody tried booting it with older (but raven ridge-compatible) BIOS?
 
Apr 20, 2002
37
0
61
I was looking for a cheap motherboard to pair with 200GE and I found this warning: https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/A320M-HDV/index.asp#Specification

"If you use Athlon 200GE APU, DVI-D port will be disabled."

Is there any technical reason why DVI-D is disabled with this CPU? Can't find any articles mentioning this limitation.

Also, all boards compatible with Raven Ridge will work out of the box with 200GE or they require BIOS update?
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,105
108
126
That's interesting. I knew that for Raven Ridge, the VGA was disabled, and maybe the DVI-D. (HDMI and DP were enabled, if present.) Maybe the same thing applies to the Athlon 200GE? Most boards don't have DP, so that means that the only active output would be the HDMI.
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
3,323
17
126
What mainboard and BIOS revision is not working with the Athlon 200GE?
Asrock AB350M Pro4. Revision 1.0, BIOS v5.00. Even though it has official support. It sort of works, just not reliably.

Could also be memory related, but the DIMMs in question work fine with the original Ryzen CPU.
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,261
42
126
That's interesting. I knew that for Raven Ridge, the VGA was disabled, and maybe the DVI-D. (HDMI and DP were enabled, if present.) Maybe the same thing applies to the Athlon 200GE? Most boards don't have DP, so that means that the only active output would be the HDMI.
VGA con am4 is provided by a d/a converter, for compatibility. Athlons probably lacks one digital output
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,105
108
126
Asrock AB350M Pro4. Revision 1.0, BIOS v5.00. Even though it has official support. It sort of works, just not reliably.

Could also be memory related, but the DIMMs in question work fine with the original Ryzen CPU.
I had something similar happen. I've got an AB350M Pro4, that was running an R5 1600 OK, but will NOT run a 2200G at all stably, even with every new BIOS version. (Ok, I see 5.00 came out, I was using 4.90.)
 
Apr 20, 2002
37
0
61
That's interesting. I knew that for Raven Ridge, the VGA was disabled, and maybe the DVI-D. (HDMI and DP were enabled, if present.) Maybe the same thing applies to the Athlon 200GE? Most boards don't have DP, so that means that the only active output would be the HDMI.
That mobo has dvi, vga and HDMI. Only dvi is disabled when using the 200GE.

For me this seems so weird but yeah, clearly something is missing on that chip. It's just weird since it's yet another small detail where the chip can fit the motherboard but then some things don't work. It's a cheap CPU but not sure if it's worth the confusion
 

escrow4

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2013
3,315
2
106
That mobo has dvi, vga and HDMI. Only dvi is disabled when using the 200GE.

For me this seems so weird but yeah, clearly something is missing on that chip. It's just weird since it's yet another small detail where the chip can fit the motherboard but then some things don't work. It's a cheap CPU but not sure if it's worth the confusion
Which is why I still recommend Intel for basic boxes. The platform is mature and stable. You don't need to think if a Pentium or i3 will work or be wonky in a B360 mobo.
 
May 25, 2015
150
0
71
Which is why I still recommend Intel for basic boxes. The platform is mature and stable. You don't need to think if a Pentium or i3 will work or be wonky in a B360 mobo.
Ah yes, the "it just works" mentality strikes again.
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
3,323
17
126
I had something similar happen. I've got an AB350M Pro4, that was running an R5 1600 OK, but will NOT run a 2200G at all stably, even with every new BIOS version. (Ok, I see 5.00 came out, I was using 4.90.)
1600non-X here too. Weird, but some of these boards seems to have issues with everything other then original Ryzens, and A-series APUs. At least that's the vibe I'm getting from googling the issue.

Could be a faulty batch sneaking through QC, or a board design issue that hasn't been caught because the CPUs weren't available for testing...

In the end I gave up on it and ordered an ASUS A320M-K. It was the cheapest immediately available.

That mobo has dvi, vga and HDMI. Only dvi is disabled when using the 200GE.

For me this seems so weird but yeah, clearly something is missing on that chip. It's just weird since it's yet another small detail where the chip can fit the motherboard but then some things don't work. It's a cheap CPU but not sure if it's worth the confusion
Nothing a dust cover won't fix. Trust me, in that clientele nobody is going to even notice it's a dust cover.

What is wrong with just works?
Absolutely nothing.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
566
20
96
What is wrong with just works?
It cements the status quo. Which is fine for casuals and when there are no more noteworthy developments or disadvantages. But if even people who should know better fall back to that and thus impede improvement they themselves are waiting for that's just shortsighted.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
5,825
152
96
It cements the status quo. Which is fine for casuals and when there are no more noteworthy developments or disadvantages. But if even people who should know better fall back to that and thus impede improvement they themselves are waiting for that's just shortsighted.
Dude, we can have "it just works" and still have improvements over time.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
566
20
96
Dude, we can have "it just works" and still have improvements over time.
Dude, I was talking about the competitive landscape. "Just works" in many cases is an excuse to not try something "scary" new thus slowing down or even completely preventing adoption of alternatives. Windows OS monopoly prevented the adoption of other OSes. Android prevented the rise of other free mobile OSes. etc. pp.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
5,825
152
96
Dude, I was talking about the competitive landscape. "Just works" in many cases is an excuse to not try something "scary" new thus slowing down or even completely preventing adoption of alternatives. Windows OS monopoly prevented the adoption of other OSes. Android prevented the rise of other free mobile OSes. etc. pp.
Considering that other OSes can be and are quite different then Windows in the work flow and applications that those considering switching will have to learn all over again. Also some are so deep in the Monopoly OS that moving over to other ones will be painful and difficult for them.

I grew up using non-MS platforms like Apple II, C64, Atari 8-bit, and other systems. I also used OS/2 and BeOS before settling on Linux.
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
3,323
17
126
Okay, an update on my little Athlon adventure.

I'm happy to report it's working perfectly in the A320M-K. No weird glitches or other funny business. Performance is within margin of error compared to the B350M Pro4, so everything is still valid.

Another observation was that the board came with BIOS 3401 dated 081217, well before Raven launched (AGESA version RR 1.0.7.1). The Athlon was recognised without issue, and I could POST and update the BIOS to a version with official support.
 

ao_ika_red

Golden Member
Aug 11, 2016
1,185
18
106
I'm happy to report it's working perfectly in the A320M-K. No weird glitches or other funny business. Performance is within margin of error compared to the B350M Pro4, so everything is still valid.
That's good news because this chip will be on many A320 boards. I saw 200GE was (finally) listed yesterday at my local e-tailer but its pricing is quite close to the used Ryzen 1200.
 

escrow4

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2013
3,315
2
106
Dude, I was talking about the competitive landscape. "Just works" in many cases is an excuse to not try something "scary" new thus slowing down or even completely preventing adoption of alternatives. Windows OS monopoly prevented the adoption of other OSes. Android prevented the rise of other free mobile OSes. etc. pp.
Big leap there. Some will always use just works and some will always tinker and seek out alternatives. If I was to build another office box for myself right now it would have an i3 at the least. I don't need to think about BIOS updates, twitchy RAM, QVL lists or any odd glitches. Sure Intel has lots of problems but their stuff works.
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,105
108
126
Sure Intel has lots of problems but their stuff works.
Even as a (current) AMD "fan" (though not as far as a "fanboy", still buy / build Intel from time-to-time), I have to admit that this is true.

Intel is simply a bigger company, with a bigger (not for long, HEHE, *cough* shortage) market-share, and they spend quite a bit of revenue on platform compatibility testing. It really seems un-matched in the industry. The mobo makers deserve some credit here too. For the last 10 years, they've (mostly) had a really good quality-of-implementation standard, but some of that (most?) comes as circuits from Intel.
 
Oct 26, 2015
192
0
71
Even as a (current) AMD "fan" (though not as far as a "fanboy", still buy / build Intel from time-to-time), I have to admit that this is true.

Intel is simply a bigger company, with a bigger (not for long, HEHE, *cough* shortage) market-share, and they spend quite a bit of revenue on platform compatibility testing. It really seems un-matched in the industry. The mobo makers deserve some credit here too. For the last 10 years, they've (mostly) had a really good quality-of-implementation standard, but some of that (most?) comes as circuits from Intel.
They are polishing the same architecture since forever. So, shouldn't it be obvious?
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,741
0
126
From this article from Phoronix the Athlon 200GE performs in Linux quite well being a 35W APU.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-athlon-200ge&num=1
Of course I'll stick with what I said earlier that this APU is really only good for those on a tight budget or need something with a low TDP.
Getting an i5-2500K class CPU + decent low end GPU for $60 with a combined 35 watt TDP is pretty nice.

If I was on a budget I'd pick this for my next music jukebox, but I'm now leaning towards spending much more for a tiny fanless NUC from Zotac or Azulle with an i5 laptop CPU.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
566
20
96
Big leap there. Some will always use just works and some will always tinker and seek out alternatives. If I was to build another office box for myself right now it would have an i3 at the least. I don't need to think about BIOS updates, twitchy RAM, QVL lists or any odd glitches. Sure Intel has lots of problems but their stuff works.
Not a big leap if you follow the conversation and know that I specifically wrote "But if even people who should know better fall back to that (i.e. 'just work') and thus impede improvement they themselves are waiting for that's just shortsighted." It's natural that solutions that are widespread and many people know about and used to are usually better supported, more polished and easier to find help for.

So of course a top dog like Intel is going to fare far better there than AMD or (to make the difference even more crass, lol) VIA. For the difference to reduce AMD relies on the support of OEMs, and OEMs usually only put in the effort if there's sufficient demand for it to be worth. Demand has to be there even if the platform is not yet polished, widely supported etc. Only then we can get more competition with more platforms that 'just works'. AMD did this ecosystem building really well with Ryzen so far considering the young age and still limited support (palpable with Ryzen Mobile).

I'd say the opposite example where too many customers just ask for competition without there being a sufficient quantity of early adopters actually backing it is the Radeon consumer GPU line were as a result AMD appears to have dropped their efforts for it behind their CPU, semi customs and server GPU as well as APU business.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY