• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ryzen 3 2200g APU good choice for non gaming use for the future?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
With current prices the Core i5 8400 at $215 is not recommended.

Personally I would get the Ryzen R3 2200G with a nice B450 board and upgrade in 2-3 years to a 7nm APU.

Well, first of all, the 8400 is available for 200.00 from Amazon. The 2400g is 160.00 while the 2200 is 99.00. So you would pay 60.00 for hyperthreading and a few extra gpu units that will probably be bandwidth limited anyway, but not 40.00 for 2 more real cores vs 2400? OK, whatever you say. I still say the 2400 is overpriced relative to the 2200. Either go "cheap" and get the 2200 or go hex core, either ryzen or 8400.
 
I would either go with the 2200 or the 2600 with a discrete card. The 2400 has always seemed overpriced to me relative to either of those other cpus.
For a 5 year use case, of those 2, i would go with the 2600. You could also go with the i5 8400. It would give good cpu performance with an adequate igpu that could be upgraded later if needed. Personally that would be my choice.

I have been toying with the idea of getting a new "cheapish" PC and in looking around at AMD's offerings, the 2200 has a certain appeal, but as you said, the cost of the 2400 is just too close to the 2600(even allowing for the 2600's no gpu), so if I go this route myself, I think the 2600 would be my pick.

As cost is a larger issue than it normally is for me with wanting a "cheapish" PC, I would go AMD(even if it meant I needed a x470 motherboard) instead of Intel here, in case Zen 2 or Zen 2+ is a real home run product, then I could just do a CPU upgrade.
 
I have been toying with the idea of getting a new "cheapish" PC and in looking around at AMD's offerings, the 2200 has a certain appeal, but as you said, the cost of the 2400 is just too close to the 2600(even allowing for the 2600's no gpu), so if I go this route myself, I think the 2600 would be my pick.

As cost is a larger issue than it normally is for me with wanting a "cheapish" PC, I would go AMD(even if it meant I needed a x470 motherboard) instead of Intel here, in case Zen 2 or Zen 2+ is a real home run product, then I could just do a CPU upgrade.
Well to me the 2400G is better suited to a SFF or HTPC type system. However I can see folks not wanting to buy an overpriced video card right now going for this APU and then getting a video card later.
 
Well to me the 2400G is better suited to a SFF or HTPC type system. However I can see folks not wanting to buy an overpriced video card right now going for this APU and then getting a video card later.
Would a 2200g not suffice for these?
 
True and I rather go that route but for SFF or HTPC the 2400G can't be beat.

For this usage the soon to come Athlons 220GE/240GE should be ideal, albeit they ll be lowly (c)locked...

Otherwise AMD should consider releasing a regular 65W 4C/8T APU at say 3.5GHz, locked and at more competitive price than the 2400G as not everyone is interested by overclocking.
 
For this usage the soon to come Athlons 220GE/240GE should be ideal, albeit they ll be lowly (c)locked...

Otherwise AMD should consider releasing a regular 65W 4C/8T APU at say 3.5GHz, locked and at more competitive price than the 2400G as not everyone is interested by overclocking.
The 2400G is fine, you don't have to overclock if you don't want to.
 
Back
Top