IIRC 32MB is the minimum when the iGPU is enabled (consumed by the GPU registers).
When enabled the allocation isn't dynamic, the FB size is substracted from the total amount of physical memory regardless if the FB is empty or not.
how much memory would the iGPU confiscate regardless if its used or not?
R3 2
That is not best comparison.
- X4 950 cannot keep up with with GTX 1050Ti in some games and same goes for G4560 both are incapable of getting steady/smooth 60 fps in new games. Yes, they give you good framerates for money, but are both actually worth your money?
Here is comparison:
- X4 950 is AM4, cheapest, weakest - excellent upgrade path! (Currently not on the price list, but usually for ~60$)
- G4560 good performance, yet to weak to handle good midrange dGPU? Still good, yet expensive upgrade path / old. (~75$)
- 2200G most expensive, excellent upgrade path, iGPU (guessing start price at ~110$)
About expensive fast ddr4!?
Seriuosly!
+ https://pcpartpicker.com/products/memory/#sort=price&page=1 (almost same for EU market)
- 84$ 2400MT/s CL17 DDR4 8GB (1x4 = SC) - not worth!
- 88$ 2400MT/s CL17 DDR4 8GB (2x4 = DC) - not worth!
- 109$ 3200MT/s CL16 DDR4 8Gb (2x4 = DC) - worth!
Why?
1. 2400 or 2133MT/s CL15 or CL17 is just waste of your money! Go with DDR3 system, used one you will get pretty cheap deal or just buy Intel LGA 1151 100 series with support for DDR3, easily you can get used DDR3 for 40$ (DC-low latency even over 2000MT/s).
2. Much faster ram is only 20-25$, with that comes more stable frame rates, better CPU performance and so on!
Build prices?
1. 60$ + 88$ + dGPU (75$ - GT 1030) = 223$
2. 75$ + 88$ + 75$ = 238$
3. 110$ + 88$ = 198$
Conclusion:
If you think that GT 1030 will give you good 1080P you are wrong! If you think that G4560 and X4 950 are decent CPUs you are wrong! Either way you will need to upgrade CPU, if you want decent performance. Even 2200G(i3 or older i5) is not decent anymore, they are minimum for latest games!
So my recommendations:
1. A8 9600 70$ or G4560 75$ (maybe esport games, but mostly for light work, browsing etc)!
G4560 doesn't offer you great upgrade path, but who cares! It supports DDR3 which can be found much cheaper.
2. 2200G with decent DDR4 (+ dGPU, GTX 1050 or RX 560 and up)
3. 2400G with decent DDR4 (+ dGPU, GTX 1060 or RX 470 and up)
4. i5 8400/R5 1600 with decent DDR4 (+dGPU, GTX 1070 and RX VEGA 56 up)
.... simple.
Seriously GN?
He usually test games looking into the sky, or outside city.
I do agree that GTX 1050Ti is kinda balanced with G4560, but G4560 is at max there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tgdvZGvulI
Of course it is about ingame settings!
720p vs 1080p matters! Field view matters( gtx 1080Ti with FV on low even at 4K would look bad)! Populations matters, etc.
Stop talking nonsense there is only 25$ difference between r3 1200x and g4560
I didn't mention Ryzen 3? I agree and would personally go with a 4C/4T CPU if building a budget gaming rig, I'm just saying that a G4560 is 'good enough' for 60fps gaming and you can save a bit of money on DDR4 2400 too. $25 here, $20 there, at this level of budget it actually makes a difference.
No it is not! The end
If you say so? It's OK you can ignore the GN benchmarks or any other performance data widely available on the net. 'The end' haha
Of course it is.
I gave you a proof and you ignore it.
AC, CoD, Wildlands, BF1 MP 64p, Witcher 3,Watchdogs, Mafia, PUBG,...
Go and ask owners...
It was never a matter if there is something better for the price, the point was if it worth it considering the alternatives or if it will even sell at all considering by price it is A12-9800 replacement, what it is a highly irrelevant APU right now.
Its also no fair, why you are going to use 2x4GB if you are not going to use the igp? you are really making more complicated future ram upgrades, as cheap motherboards have only 2 slots. Makes no sence to me. Also you need to waste 2GB of ram on the igp.
And i already have said it, if im building something to upgrade later, i would pick the A8-9600+GTX1050/RX560+1x8GB, i would not expend a single buck on the 2200G -or the 2400G for that matter-, even less on the consideration that i need to OC it, and 2x4GB is also really a bad idea if you plan to upgrade later.
Everyone seems to be bashing the Excavator cores, but they are really not that bad for the price, look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiXxkeyLiJ8
$70 - A8-9600
$120 - GTX1050 2GB
$90 - 8GB DDR4-2400
$280 It will fly circles around that 2200G, it can do 1080p, it has the full 8GB of ram avalible and you can drop in another 8GB of ram wharever you want. And if you can get the X4 950 even better,
Now, if i looking for non-gaming builds thats another thing enterely, the 8100 cant compete until H310 is launched, That is were those APU shines, on buiilds that you would be using 8100/8400 whiout dgpus.
Not here, the non IGP versions of AMD apu were never avalible here, EVER. It may be avalible in the US.
LOL. Now, really?
IIRC 32MB is the minimum when the iGPU is enabled (consumed by the GPU registers).
When enabled the allocation isn't dynamic, the FB size is substracted from the total amount of physical memory regardless if the FB is empty or not.
$220 vs $280 is a lot of a difference for a budget constrained PC system, those 60$ can be put for a 22-24" Freesync monitor.
Ryzen 2200G OC + 3600 RAM + Freesync monitor will allow for 1080p (Low/Med/High depending of the game) gaming in the vast majority of games. I will have to say that gaming experience could be better at 1080p Low + Freesync with the Ryzen 2200G than 1080p Medium with A8-9600 + GTX1050 and no freesync.
Again, for the price you cannot have a better entry level PC system that is able to play games at 1080p and have the ability to upgrade to a 8C 16T CPU or create a USFF system.
Im not saying its the best all around option for everyone but the truth is its the best at its price. And you will really have to compromise the CPU performance to get similar GPU performance with a different setup at the same price.
Yet AMD avoived any kind of direct game comparison... You have no idea of how well the IGP of a 2200G performs, and even if its like the 1030 what is already too optimistic, thats crap, pure and simple.
There is no way the 2200G will offer better gaming experience than a 1050 paired wth a lower cpu.
LOL. Now, really?
That's assuming they use the same IMC and same motherboards as Ryzen. Raven Ridge is confirmed to be improved in that regard. They overclocked it to 4.2GHz on stage, which currently only top binned Ryzen (Threadripper) would do, and these aren't top bins from the model numbers. So basically don't assume the same limitations apply.Also, How well does the average 3600 RAM stick and average AM4 motherboard work together? I am not under the impression this just works with any stick + MB combination. But requires careful selection. Meaning Extra Premium Samsung B-Dies or some such thing, and then maybe some luck...
In the builds I have seen in this forums I have seen people struggle to get 3200MHz working, and don't remember anyone getting 3600MHz working.
A better IMC allows sticks that are rated at X speed to often hit higher. My 6600K machine had dual 2400 CL15 Hynix sticks that I could OC to 3000 with a Z170-D3H.Does it make sense to get an expensive high end MB, and expensive high end ram, to squeeze a bit more out of the on board GPU of a $99 APU?
I think the performance will be somewhere in the middle... Good enough for esports gaming for sure.
Pffffft can´t wait to see the benchmarks of these things... Also i can´t seem to find a price-drop indication for the 1200 cpu... I mean if AMD are going to replace the 1200 with the 2200, would it not be fair of AMD to drop the price to a lower point? Sure ¨fairness¨ is not something which is applicable in sales, but just saying my hope is that they will drop the price ROFL....
Interesting. So the 256MB framebuffer we see on Raven Ridge laptops isn't dynamic? This could be why frametimes consistency is absolute garbage on it. Last gen APU's allowed you to tweak that framebuffer.IIRC 32MB is the minimum when the iGPU is enabled (consumed by the GPU registers).
When enabled the allocation isn't dynamic, the FB size is substracted from the total amount of physical memory regardless if the FB is empty or not.
Interesting. So the 256MB framebuffer we see on Raven Ridge laptops isn't dynamic? This could be why frametimes consistency is absolute garbage on it. Last gen APU's allowed you to tweak that framebuffer.
Where did you see that? I've been looking for that, but the dude making benchmark videos on YouTube claims that his BIOS doesn't have the option.Some tech site did a review with various graphics memory limits for raven ridge, made no difference...so must be dynamic.
I've editedWhere did you see that? I've been looking for that, but the dude making benchmark videos on YouTube claims that his BIOS doesn't have the option.
Where did you see that? I've been looking for that, but the dude making benchmark videos on YouTube claims that his BIOS doesn't have the option.