AMD Ryzen 5 2400G and Ryzen 3 2200G APUs performance unveiled

[Shivansps]

Why should they?? AMDs product is an Apu, it should be compared to other APUs, which it is now the market leader (in regards to graphics mated to a decent cpu)...why would you expect a company to advertise their products in a worse situation than they have to?

YET, amd avoided this kind of comparisons now and decided to only target Intel IGP with is nothing.

 

[The Stilt]

Not much point in speculating at this point, since we'll have the actual data in no time.

I'm more interested about the graphics performance difference between the 2200G and 2400G.
The difference should be quite diminishing between the two, since increasing the GPU frequency by 24% only resulted in 8.2% difference in performance (at 3200MHz MEMCLK).
The difference between the 2200G and 2400G SKU is 56%, but I don't expect the actual difference to be higher than < 15% with everything else being equal.

I'd say dropping the SMT support on 2200G was a wise choice marketing wise due to that.
The price difference is still rather drastic as well.

 

[LTC8K6]

There are also two variants of the MX 150.
One with 937MHz base clock and 8 ROPs, and one with 1227MHz base clock and 16 ROPs.

https://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=2.81731860.244415880.1516792089-1153635884.1515466042#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search2/gpu/fs/P/1141/5000?minScore=0&gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce MX150&gpuCount=1

Yeah, it's common to have two mobile GPUs with the same name but different specs.

 

[raghu78]

Not much point in speculating at this point, since we'll have the actual data in no time.

I'm more interested about the graphics performance difference between the 2200G and 2400G.
The difference should be quite diminishing between the two, since increasing the GPU frequency by 24% only resulted in 8.2% difference in performance (at 3200MHz MEMCLK).
The difference between the 2200G and 2400G SKU is 56%, but I don't expect the actual difference to be higher than < 15% with everything else being equal.

I'd say dropping the SMT support on 2200G was a wise choice marketing wise due to that.
The price difference is still rather drastic as well.

I think the 2200G is going to be a killer gaming APU for anybody with a very low budget. 2200G will be very popular in developing countries like India where low end PCs still make up a lot of volume.

 

[PeterScott]

Office computers need the barest minimum of graphics capabilities. Even a GT710 is plenty.
The GPU in the 2200G/2400G is way more than an office computer needs.

Even an Intel iGPU is plenty.

 

[PeterScott]

I think the 2200G is going to be a killer gaming APU for anybody with a very low budget. 2200G will be very popular in developing countries like India where low end PCs still make up a lot of volume.

Wouldn't the same have applied to previous generation AMD APU's?

 

[whm1974]

Wouldn't the same have applied to previous generation AMD APU's?

But current owners of previous APU will be replacing them so the RR APUs should very well.

 

[raghu78]

Wouldn't the same have applied to previous generation AMD APU's?

The CPU core is vastly better and ST perf is massively up removing any CPU bottlenecks even with integrated graphics. You are getting 4 cores for USD 99 while you previously got 2C/4T based on Bulldozer based microacrchitecture. I think the combination of CPU ST/ CPU MT / GPU perf for USD 99 is going to be fantastic for the price. Lots of budget gamers are going to love it.

 

[PeterScott]

The CPU core is vastly better and ST perf is massively up removing any CPU bottlenecks even with integrated graphics. You are getting 4 cores for USD 99 while you previously got 2C/4T based on Bulldozer based microacrchitecture. I think the combination of CPU ST/ CPU MT / GPU perf for USD 99 is going to be fantastic for the price. Lots of budget gamers are going to love it.

Would severely budget constrained gamer have been concerned that they only had dual cores. They still would have chose those previous AMD APUs over a dual core Intel Pentium with it's weak iGPU.

So in reality, in that market, the position hasn't changed.

 

[rainy]

Wouldn't the same have applied to previous generation AMD APU's?

You can hardly compare 4 threads of Excavator (Bristol Ridge) to 4 Zen cores in Raven Ridge - the latter would have big advantage in ST/MT performance (also efficiency).
In addition, you have also quite a bit stronger IGP.

Would severely budget constrained gamer have been concerned that they only had dual cores. They still would have chose those previous AMD APUs over a dual core Intel Pentium with it's weak iGPU.

So in reality, in that market, the position hasn't changed.

No, you are completely wrong:
with previous architecture it wasn't a good idea to add low-end dGPU to APU because of CPU bottleneck.
With Raven Ridge it's no problem, 2200G and GTX 1050 would be a nice combo.

 

[LTC8K6]

The CPU core is vastly better and ST perf is massively up removing any CPU bottlenecks even with integrated graphics. You are getting 4 cores for USD 99 while you previously got 2C/4T based on Bulldozer based microacrchitecture. I think the combination of CPU ST/ CPU MT / GPU perf for USD 99 is going to be fantastic for the price. Lots of budget gamers are going to love it.

That vastly improved CPU core may cause it's own problems when trying to run with an improved gpu under bandwidth and thermal limitations.

 

[PeterScott]

You can hardly compare 4 threads of Excavator (Bristol Ridge) to 4 Zen cores in Raven Ridge - the latter would have big advantage in ST/MT performance (also efficiency).
In addition, you have also quite a bit stronger IGP.

I am not comparing them. I am comparing the previous situation to the current situation.

Previous APUs were better than Pentiums with IGP, and today that situation remains.

No, you are completely wrong:
with previous architecture it wasn't a good idea to add low-end dGPU to APU because of CPU bottleneck.
With Raven Ridge it's no problem, 2200G and GTX 1050 would be a nice combo.

Again not what we are talking about. He keeps limiting the discussion to very budget constrained people who can't afford a dGPU.

So it is only AMD APU vs Intel IGP.

A battle AMD has won for a great many years.

 

[rainy]

That vastly improved CPU core may cause it's own problems when trying to run with an improved gpu under bandwidth and thermal limitations.

We are talking about desktop parts like 2200G/2400G with 65W TDP and support of faster RAM, your argument make sense in relation to 2500U/2700U with cTDP 12-25W range and DDR4-2400 support.

I am not comparing them. I am comparing the previous situation to the current situation.

Previous APUs were better than Pentiums with IGP, and today that situation remains.

They are vastly better - 2200G would have a really serious advantage over A12-9800.

Again not what we are talking about. He keeps limiting the discussion to very budget constrained people who can't afford a dGPU.

So it is only AMD APU vs Intel IGP.

A battle AMD has won for a great many years.

Honestly, I don't know what you're expecting: 2200G for 50 dollars?

Btw, AMD is not responsible for high prices of RAM at this moment.

 

[LTC8K6]

We are talking about desktop parts like 2200G/2400G with 65W TDP and support of faster RAM, your argument make sense in relation to 2500U/2700U with cTDP 12-25W range and DDR4-2400 support.

No, I mean the desktop parts.

We will just have to wait and see how they perform.

 

[raghu78]

I am not comparing them. I am comparing the previous situation to the current situation.

Previous APUs were better than Pentiums with IGP, and today that situation remains.

Again not what we are talking about. He keeps limiting the discussion to very budget constrained people who can't afford a dGPU.

So it is only AMD APU vs Intel IGP.

A battle AMD has won for a great many years.

You will never understand the factor of price when building a PC in India. I know since I come from there and have had experience selling low cost PCs. Here are channel prices for major PC components. Feel free to keep pushing your GTX 1050 minimum argument to everybody.

http://www.deltapage.com/content/price.htm

 

[Insert_Nickname]

We will just have to wait and see how they perform.

Yup. It is only two and a half week, and we'll have hard data. Not too long to wait.

 

[IRobot23]

There are also two variants of the MX 150.
One with 937MHz base clock and 8 ROPs, and one with 1227MHz base clock and 16 ROPs.

https://www.3dmark.com/search?_ga=2.81731860.244415880.1516792089-1153635884.1515466042#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search2/gpu/fs/P/1141/5000?minScore=0&gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce MX150&gpuCount=1

Well GT 1030 out of the box runs below 1500MHz and based on that it scores around 3300-3400p @ firestrike 1080p.

Anyway buying GT 1030 and G4560 is just crazy, basically it cost same as 2400G. We all know that prices of DRAM are high, but you can get faster ram for few $ more and it is worth it.

 

[PhonakV30]

AMD Ryzen 5 2500U driver comparison. 17.7 "Official" vs. 18.1.1 Wolfenstein II :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B6FlUA9PKI&t=17s

Up to 35%.depend on situation.

 

[Shivansps]

Come on, wake up, the old A10-7870K managed to beat an R7 250 ($90) DDR3 when paired with fast DDR3 rams, as well as GT740 ($100) DDR3. The A8-7600 managed to beat an R7 240 ($70) with fast ram.

Thats not one, but TWO tiers of entry level dGPUS.

Now comes an $170 2400G that is very likely to be slower than GT1030 ($75).
I know this is because GDDR5.

The good part here, is now that the APU have decent CPU cores, you can actually plant to build a 2400G gaming pc and add a decent dGPU later.

Everything else is the same, and even a bit worse if those new APUs cant beat any dGPU (GT710 dosent count).

 

[rainy]

AMD Ryzen 5 2500U driver comparison. 17.7 "Official" vs. 18.1.1 Wolfenstein II :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B6FlUA9PKI&t=17s

Up to 35%.depend on situation.

I presume that Wolfstein II could be a best scenario, nonetheless it's an impressive gain.

 

[PeterScott]

You will never understand the factor of price when building a PC in India. I know since I come from there and have had experience selling low cost PCs. Here are channel prices for major PC components. Feel free to keep pushing your GTX 1050 minimum argument to everybody.

http://www.deltapage.com/content/price.htm

What is laughable, is the post I replied to was pushing the GTX 1050, not me.

I was working within your constraint, of being unable to afford a dGPU.

And the point I made was quite valid.

If you can't afford a dGPU, then Raven Ridge does NOT alter the competitive landscape.

AMD already won that battle years ago.

If you wanted to game at the ultra low end without a dGPU for the last several years, an AMD APU was your best choice.

So an AMD APU being your best choice at this end of the market is NOT a new thing.

 

[LTC8K6]

With the 2200G/2400G you are pretty much going to lose 2gb of your DDR4 to the graphics.

A cheap DGPU system could probably get away with a single 4gb stick of DDR4, but the APUs probably can't.

The APUs are going to need the dual channel bandwidth, so you are talking about buying 8gb of DDR4 and having 6gb available.

If you go with the same memory, the DGPU system will have 2 more gb of ram free overall than the APU system.

 

[whm1974]

With the 2200G/2400G you are pretty much going to lose 2gb of your DDR4 to the graphics.

A cheap DGPU system could probably get away with a single 4gb stick of DDR4, but the APUs probably can't.

The APUs are going to need the dual channel bandwidth, so you are talking about buying 8gb of DDR4 and having 6gb available.

If you go with the same memory, the DGPU system will have 2 more gb of ram free overall than the APU system.

Yeah that is a big drawback of using iGPUs. If DDR4 memory wasn't so expendsive the solution would be just get 16GB of it, but alas...

 

[LTC8K6]

AMD Ryzen 5 2500U driver comparison. 17.7 "Official" vs. 18.1.1 Wolfenstein II :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B6FlUA9PKI&t=17s

Up to 35%.depend on situation.

It seems to say very little ram is being used for the graphics, less than 250mb, and 6.5gb of ram is being used for the game?

 

[lixlax]

It seems to say very little ram is being used for the graphics, less than 250mb, and 6.5gb of ram is being used for the game?

Isn't it something like this: ~250MB is reserved for the GPU and it sees that portion as VRAM, if more is needed it'll start using the "main system memory"? like if a dGPU runs out of VRAM and starts dumping less used data to RAM. Only in this case the VRAM and system RAM are physically the same.