Those reviews are awful though. Many getting at least a bad stick.
A water cooled "budget" solution with fast, expensive memory to maybe eke out performance approaching a GT 1030? OK, if you say so.To be honest I have never used free sync so I'm not entirely sure what kind of a difference it would make in the real world, I've seen s ton of screen tearing on igp tests, if it could stop that then it could be a good feature.
Why don't all TVs and monitors support it? Seems like a no brainer seeing as Xbox one X has it.
If you were wanting something as a 18month - 2 year stop gap whilst you wait for 7nm CPU/gpu then it could become a viable setup.
Water cool it, 3200 memory OC, 400 series mobo, overclock the hell out of it.... perfectly fine for 900p high gaming or old titles I'm sure, which is all I want for the time being.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820158203&cm_re=ddr4-_-20-158-203-_-Product
$74
Lower speed RAM is also much less finicky about brand, so there is no need to buy the more expensive brand, when going with 2400 speed.
Which is why the post you quoted suggested a GTX 1050. Even before the Ryzen APUs arrive it makes little sense to buy a GT1030.
If you want to game, a $130 GTX 1050 is a reasonable minimum, and with ram savings, hardly that much for a better gaming experience.
btw if the GT1030 does not make sense why is Nvidia selling it for desktops and why is almost every decent entry level notebook shipping with Geforce MX 150. There is significant business volume in these low end graphics. Ryzen APUs are going to be a hugely popular product in budget DIY and even OEM PCs.
Stop looking at things from point of view of performance and more from a point of view of price. There are countries like India where even USD 400 (INR 25000) is a significant amount of money and many people do not even earn so much for their monthly income.The per capita monthly income of India is USD 140.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_India
.
You are right. And that keeps being done because the only way to justify an APU, is to restrict the price to a very narrow window. I agree though, it is a circular argument, and even in a price constrained scenario, one has to impose a lot of conditions to have an apu make sense for gaming.Why stop there. If money is that tight a sub $200 Chromebook makes more sense.
It looks to me like your argument centers around picking the exact price point of a minimal Ryzen APU based PC, and then arguing that Ryzen APU wins that price point, which is a fairly circular argument.
Do note that I think the Ryzen APU is a fantastic part. I have been saying all along it's AMDs most important part, before it was even released. I have been saying I would love to see it in the new Mac Mini (It would do a lot to convince me to buy a Mac Mini).
With Ryzen APU, AMD now has a credible competitor to Intel in just about ever consumer segment. Performance is no longer a reason for AMD selling less CPUs than Intel.
But my personal interest in it for Windows Desktop was only as far as it would enable me to play the one game I wanted to play (Witcher 3) to ride out the crap storm that is the GPU market right now. I am fairly sure it won't do that to my satisfaction, so I am personally out, and back to waiting for sanity to return to the GPU market.
Buying a "low end" card certainly does make sense when it has superior performance, which most likely a 1030 and certainly anything higher will.Buying a low end add in card doesn't make sense anymore with these powerful little Ryzen APUs on the market. Anyone in the market for a 1030 is most likely buying them because intel's graphics weren't enough to do much of anything related to gaming except fail. Consumers weren't buying them by choice really but because it was the next step up from intel's poor Gpu effort. Ryzen APUs set the bar much higher with a powerful CPU and a powerful GPU in a chip that people will want especially with the overxlockability. (even if somebody at PCPer can't grasp why anyone would want to overclock an APU. Is overclocking restricted to the PC elites now while us peons just aren't privileged enough?)
These things are looking to be wicked fun to play with, with piles of room to overclock with a %50 overclock on Vega with tangible benefits. Another bonus is the Adrenaline drivers and Radeon software, that makes a nice neat little package without having to have Intel and nv's, for example, drivers and software on the same system. Performance responds very well to overclocking the memory as well.
Price/performance is a big win for Ryzen G series and it looks quite desirable. Even more so since it isnt sullied with the stigma of intel's Meltdown problem.
Buying a "low end" card certainly does make sense when it has superior performance, which most likely a 1030 and certainly anything higher will.
As has already been pointed out, ALL memory prices are insane....cost of 3200 memory is not that different from 2400 memory. (10-15$)A water cooled "budget" solution with fast, expensive memory to maybe eke out performance approaching a GT 1030? OK, if you say so.
You get an all-round faster system that is more future proof than buying a pentium with slower memory and a gtx 1030...although you would get slightly better frame rates if you overclocked the 1030.
With Ryzen you have the choice to consist you want, with intel there is no choice..it's dgpu or bust, limited upgrade path.
Personally I think that for a proper gaming system, the bare minimum dGPU should be the 1050Ti. However due to higher prices of video cards I can see the 2400G w/ 3200 RAM serving as a stopgap for budget gamers until prices return to normal.Pentium + GT1030 makes no sence to me, it never did, and specially now not, combining both the weaker CPU+dGPU on the market is not a good idea. Ill go for the 2400G instead, its the same price of a G4560+GT1030, even if the performance is slower than a GT1030, you have a strong CPU base to upgrade to a dgpu later.
G4560+GTX1050+8GB DDR4-2400 in other hand is a valid alternative to 2400G+8GB DDR4-3200, the problem is, since we started to talk about this, the 1050 base price increased by $15. For now, the memory prices helps to offset the pentium+1050 price... but if the price increases again...
Personally I think that for a proper gaming system, the bare minimum dGPU should be the 1050Ti. However due to higher prices of video cards I can see the 2400G w/ 3200 RAM serving as a stopgap for budget gamers until prices return to normal.
Why stop there. If money is that tight a sub $200 Chromebook makes more sense.
It looks to me like your argument centers around picking the exact price point of a minimal Ryzen APU based PC, and then arguing that Ryzen APU wins that price point, which is a fairly circular argument.
Do note that I think the Ryzen APU is a fantastic part. I have been saying all along it's AMDs most important part, before it was even released. I have been saying I would love to see it in the new Mac Mini (It would do a lot to convince me to buy a Mac Mini).
With Ryzen APU, AMD now has a credible competitor to Intel in just about ever consumer segment. Performance is no longer a reason for AMD selling less CPUs than Intel.
But my personal interest in it for Windows Desktop was only as far as it would enable me to play the one game I wanted to play (Witcher 3) to ride out the crap storm that is the GPU market right now. I am fairly sure it won't do that to my satisfaction, so I am personally out, and back to waiting for sanity to return to the GPU market.
FYI most kids and teenagers who use a PC also game on it. You should see how popular games like Counter Strike, DOTA, GTA V with 12-16 year olds. btw Chromebooks are underpowered crap and cannot game at all. The question is what to buy when you are on a tight budget like INR 25000 (roughly USD 400), especially if you want productivity and gaming. Its a very legitimate use case and a huge market in developing countries. Do not think everybody wants to buy a PC with a GTX 1050 because you think that is the minimum needed for gaming. Thats your opinion based on your understanding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem.Well when you spend most of your posts either praising AMD, or attacking Intel, and then you use circular reasoning to set up a can't lose case for Ryzen APU, winning the price battle at the exact price point of Ryzen APU, contest.
It looks like a wee bit of bias.
I support and root for AMD openly. But I criticize them too when they come up with crap like Vega. I praise Intel when they come with great cpus like 8700k and criticize them for their complacency and pathetic 10nm execution. I always support competition but root for the underdog. Not ashamed of that. As for Ryzen APU let me say the market will decide how popular it is and I have good reason to believe it will be wildly popular and hugely successful.Well when you spend most of your posts either praising AMD, or attacking Intel, and then you use circular reasoning to set up a can't lose case for Ryzen APU, winning the price battle at the exact price point of Ryzen APU, contest.
It looks like a wee bit of bias.
I support and root for AMD openly. But I criticize them too when they come up with crap like Vega. I praise Intel when they come with great cpus like 8700k and criticize them for their complacency and pathetic 10nm execution. I always support competition but root for the underdog. Not ashamed of that. As for Ryzen APU let me say the market will decide how popular it is and I have good reason to believe it will be wildly popular and hugely successful.
I never commented on your buying choices. I only stated there is a huge market to which Ryzen APUs would be very appealing. You should probably tell techreport to remove their G4560 + GT1030 econobox recommendation if you feel strongly that everyone should aim for GTX 1050 minimum spec for gaming. lol.I like a competitive landscape, but I don't support once side over the other. Look at what I said about Ryzen APU in my post above. It was overwhelmingly positive, but you largely ignored that to concentrate on any perceived AMD slight, in what you admit is your quest to "support and root for AMD openly".
Ryzen has all the technical pieces in place. It is a great part. It should gain market share for AMD. How much is an open question, because market inertia, and mindshare are not automatically overcome by having a great part.
I agree that if you can't have a dGPU for whatever reason, then a Ryzen APU is most likely the best choice for you, with the exception of non gamers just getting a cheaper Intel Dual core if AMD doesn't offer a Ryzen APU part in that price range.
Other than that my personal needs for a an upgrade indicate a dGPU as a necessity, which you really have no place arguing against.
Aside from the 1050 only having 2GB of memory I would agree with you. But of course 2GB may enough depending which games the gamer plays and at what settings.Well, the 1050TI also fell victim to mining due to 4GB VRAM. And it always was overpriced to me for what it was. The regular GTX1050 gets the job done just fine.
This year will be interesting CPU-wise, remember there are 2 lower I3 coming, the I3-8020 and the I3-8000, and Pentium G5400 will probably return to $60.
How much ram will these APUs be able to use for graphics?Aside from the 1050 only having 2GB of memory I would agree with you. But of course 2GB may enough depending which games the gamer plays and at what settings.
Yeah I'm thinking that the 2400G at least will need 16GB to really fly.How much ram will these APUs be able to use for graphics?
If they can use up to 4gb, that's a substantial chunk of system ram.
You'd want more than 8gb total ram, to allow the APU to use 4gb.