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

[LTC8K6]

Seems like there's a perfect opportunity for a workstation chip with an IGP or a workstation APU?
The Xeons that used to have an IGP were no more than 4 core parts.

Wiki has CL-H chips listed with HD630, which are probably just the 8700 series die.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors#"Coffee_Lake-H"_(14_nm)

 

[Abwx]

G4620 is $97 runs at 3.7ghz and has HD630. It seems right in the 2200G ballpark. HD630 should fare better than HD610.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1304306-REG/intel_bx80677g4620_pentium_g4620_3_7_ghz.html

550 pts in CB R15 for the 2200G and 400 pts for the G4620, that s a same ballpark.?.

Or are you talking of the iGPU ?
For the same kind of ballpark surely...

 

[LTC8K6]

550 pts in CB R15 for the 2200G and 400 pts for the G4620, that s a same ballpark.?.

Or are you talking of the iGPU ?
For the same kind of ballpark surely...

Price.

 

[Shivansps]

Said by someone, who is clearly unbiased./s

Yes, you have any example of the contrary? Or discussing about an APU whiout saing "this is the best thing ever" is biased to you?

Seriusly, you have any example? because i can fill 2 pages of quotes of users moving the goalpost constantly so AMD is better no matter what.
Never defended Intel IGP, never defended the GT1030 i said:

1) The new APUs must provide better performance than a GT1030 or this will be the first APU ever to be slower than every dGPU in the market (truth).

2) The APU have an vega version of the RX550 integraded and it will have more bandwidth than a GT1030 starting from DDR4-3200, i also said the bandwidth is shared with the CPU. (truth)

3) I said i dont belive the APU are faster than GT1030 in gaming because AMD own slides makes me belive this is the case. (truth and i quoted the examples)

4) I said a G4560/A8-9600 + GTX1050 will provide better gaming performance (truth, wharever you like it or not).

5) I said people does not tend to buy expensive APU, they buy the basic entry level ones(7300/9500/9600), then they jump to a dgpu like GTX1050 if they truly intent to game. (if you dont belive me thats your problem, steam survey backs this up).

6) I said i expect 2400G to be better than GT1030 like the older gens were. (whats wrong with this?)

 

[french toast]

Price.

Which combined with performance makes it not comparable or competitive.
Context.

 

[prtskg]

I don't think Nvidia will release any graphics card to counter integrated graphics. Integrated graphics systems will always be much cheaper than cpu+dgpu systems. They don't need the race to bottom. There is much more profitability in going for more performance dgpu. GT1030 is good enough at the bottom level.

 

[rainy]

Yes, you have any example of the contrary? Or discussing about an APU whiout saing "this is the best thing ever" is biased to you?

I don't recall anyone, who said that Raven Ridge is best thing ever, however it would be definitely best APU made by AMD.

 

[Shivansps]

I don't recall anyone, who said that Raven Ridge is best thing ever, however it would be definitely best APU made by AMD.

You know exactly what i meant, don't try to escape from it doing a string comparison.

And i dont agree, it cant be the best if its worse than every dgpu. Kaveri and Richland were far better value if thats the case. And its AMD itselft what makes me to belive this is the case, im not saying this based on nothing.

 

[USER8000]

The mythical release would not happen unless and until NV sees a need.
That can't happen until the APUs have been launched, real world performance is known, and market numbers are known.

So again what it is the point of people making up rubbish about some hypothetical release which Nvidia might come up with it?? So going by that a few months,so unless we can invent a time machine then its of no consequence at all. If you go on like this,then I might as well say AMD might release a desktop Ryzen APU with HBM2 between tomorrow and two years from now for $149.99 and it runs at 5GHZ.

The only mention was in this thread,not any thread I have seen elsewhere,and smacks of but,wait for the GT2030,don't buy a Ryzen APU!! Just wait sometime between now and two years,it will come out,promise!!

All I see here is every attempt to play down the 2200G in an AMD thread,and trying to push Intel alternatives which:
1.)Don't work out in price/performance at current pricing.
2.)Are on EOL platforms where a 4C/4T Core i5 is still over £150 in most parts of the world.
3.)CPUs and chipsets which are not even released and nobody has a clue when the ACTUAL RELEASE DATE WILL BE.
4.)Make belief graphics cards which are not even confirmed.
5.)Combos which cost significantly more than a 2200G.
6.)All integrated graphics is crap,so to ignore the advantage AMD has.
7.)Say Intel integrated graphics is fine,so to ignore the advantage AMD has.
8.)Ignore the driver issues Intel does have with their graphics.
9.)Ignore Intel hiring AMD to make a graphics card for them and hiring away AMD personal to make better graphics,which confirms they know their graphics is not great.
10.)Defend Intel graphics despite Intel not even defending it.
11.)Buy secondhand Intel CPUs,even if the same isn't said in Intel threads last time I checked.

I have never seen such a desperate list,and yet if you go into the Intel threads,you are not seeing people making a list of a 100 reasons not to get an Intel CPU and to buy something from Nvidia or AMD.

In fact I do browse quite a few largish tech forums,and I think this is the only place I am seeing people trying to make some of the weirdest,most obtuse excuses for someone NOT to consider a 2200G. I am not even talking about the 2400G,but the 2200G.

Everything is about spreading as much fud as possible and trying to get people to buy Intel CPUs on an EOL platform where 4C Core i5 CPUs are over £150 in most of the world and Nvidia graphics cards in an AMD thread. Lets look at what a Core i5 7400 costs:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...731&cm_re=core_i5_7400-_-19-117-731-_-Product
https://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX8067...e=UTF8&qid=1517251621&sr=1-3&keywords=i5+7400

Over $180. Then the whole,but other Intel chips are coming,when they call themselves "enthusiasts" but ignore articles which indicates delays to the rest of the Coffee Lake launch,or the Spectre/Meltdown patches which also do drop performance.

Look how they have gone all quiet about the Core i3 8100 once some of us pointed out the motherboard cost. Now its the G4560 will save them,or if we wait 2 months Intel will launch more processors and they will save us from the RED PERIL!!

It still costs more overall,and in many parts of the world the G4560 has got slightly more expensive as supplies are restricted. A G4560 and GT1030 in the UK will cost between £120 to £130 and the Ryzen 3 2200G will be under £90 at current exchange rates. So 40% to 50% more in price on a platform where even the cheapest quad core is still £150+ and is worse in everyway than a Core i5 8400 or Ryzen 5 1600.

The rest of its an attempt to delay and delay people in the hope of something better will come,which would be OK if we even knew when the rest of it is being launched.

February,March,April,May,June?? When?? AM4 Raven Ridge is out next month on the 12th.

So when is the rest of the future competition out??

Sadly for those lot,review sites will judge them on what is out. Intel might try and seed some new processors out before they are available,but again it means zero unless you can buy them in a shop.

Remember when that happened with AMD Vega or Nvidia Fermi. People kept holding on for six to twelve months,and saying wait for the new saviour and it wasn't even worth the wait.

Look in the Intel threads,none of the same people are purporting for people to buy AMD,but sing collective praises of whatever new tech Intel and how it would be awesome. Yet,funny you don't see people butting into those threads and pushing AMD:

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...er-lake-sapphire-rapid-thread.2509080/page-40

Where is all the chants of get Ryzen 2 is better in the Intel Cannonlake thread?? Or buy a secondhand CPU??

 

[whm1974]

You know exactly what i meant, don't try to escape from it doing a string comparison.

And i dont agree, it cant be the best if its worse than every dgpu. Kaveri and Richland were far better value if thats the case. And its AMD itselft what makes me to belive this is the case, im not saying this based on nothing.

Actually RR would be best APU AMD ever made if it outperforms previous APUs in both CPU and iGPU performance by a lot. And I wouldn't call the 2200G that expensive.

 

[AtenRa]

Intel doesnt have anything in the 2200G segment to compete, period.

 

[USER8000]

Actually RR would be best APU AMD ever made if it outperforms previous APUs in both CPU and iGPU performance by a lot. And I wouldn't call the 2200G that expensive.

The 2200G certainly isn't expensive and looks to be the cheapest entry level gaming system with reasonable CPU performance,and its on a platform which AMD said in an interview they will try to support with future releases. The construction core APUs,could still be CPU limited in some games,and I don't see it happening with the 2200G,so I feel this is what will boost performance in some games a good amount.

Ryzen also has a far better DDR4 controller than Bristol Ridge,which is really poor and regressed over the previous generation in measurements from what I gather. Even with 2400MHZ RAM,the 2200G should beat an A12 9800,in my estimation and it costs less money.

Its $99,and if you want a low cost system:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157766&cm_re=a320-_-13-157-766-_-Product

It even has an M2 slot,and three types of display output. So $150 in total.

 

[xblax]

I think that this entire dGPU comparison is just bullshit. Who *actually* cares if Raven Ridge is faster than Nvidias slowest dGPU? It's nice to see how they compare but in the end that comparison is just artificial. Nobody sane would ever buy a GT1030 for gaming, not even combined with a slower Intel iGPU.

The main market of these APUs is in cheap prebuilt PCs that are not meant primarily for gaming - however if these cheap PCs can play some games nonetheless that is still a huge plus for a lot of people (and for OEMs). The 2200G will compete against i3-8100 and Pentium Gold G5600 and it's the first time for AMD that the CPU performance is on par with Intel. Even if we completely ignore the GPU speed advantage, AMD can now compete with Intel's lineup. And AMD is earlier in the market than Intels competitive CPUs too.

BTW: what is the real reason why H310 and B360 Intel boards are not released yet? I don't think they are delayed due to Meltdown and Spectre. I would rather guess that the market is still flooded with lower tier Sky Lake and Kaby Lake CPUs / mainboards that couldn't be sold any more once quad core Pentiums and i3s are available for the same price.

 

[rainy]

1) The new APUs must provide better performance than a GT1030 or this will be the first APU ever to be slower than every dGPU in the market (truth).

Wrong, the idea of APU wasn't to replace low-end GPU, rather to give consumer an opportunity to play less demanding/older games without it.

2) The APU have an vega version of the RX550 integraded and it will have more bandwidth than a GT1030 starting from DDR4-3200, i also said the bandwidth is shared with the CPU. (truth)

False, 2200G with DDR4-3200 would have significantly less bandwith than GT 1030 because it must be shared between CPU and IGP.

3) I said i dont belive the APU are faster than GT1030 in gaming because AMD own slides makes me belive this is the case. (truth and i quoted the examples)

Discussion about marketing slides is pointless to me.

4) I said a G4560/A8-9600 + GTX1050 will provide better gaming performance (truth, wharever you like it or not).

2200G + GTX 1050 would be defintely more future-proof setup for a bit higher price - I wouldn't advice to buy Bristol Ridge or dual core with HT in 2018 for gaming.
If you have limited budget, then buy 2200G or 8100 if bigger 8400 or 1600 (also upcoming 2600).

5) I said people does not tend to buy expensive APU, they buy the basic entry level ones(7300/9500/9600), then they jump to a dgpu like GTX1050 if they truly intent to game. (if you dont belive me thats your problem, steam survey backs this up).

I wouldn't call good APU for 100 dollars expensive - comparing it with Bristol Ridge doesn't make sense to me.

6) I said i expect 2400G to be better than GT1030 like the older gens were. (whats wrong with this?)

Look at reply 1 and 2.
Btw, switching from DDR3 to DDR4 is much smaller jump than from DDR3 to GDDR5 as it happened to low-end GPUs.

 

[LTC8K6]

So again what it is the point of people making up rubbish about some hypothetical release which Nvidia might come up with it?? So going by that a few months,so unless we can invent a time machine then its of no consequence at all. If you go on like this,then I might as well say AMD might release a desktop Ryzen APU with HBM2 between tomorrow and two years from now for $149.99 and it runs at 5GHZ.

The only mention was in this thread,not any thread I have seen elsewhere,and smacks of but,wait for the GT2030,don't buy a Ryzen APU!! Just wait sometime between now and two years,it will come out,promise!!

I'm pretty sure I have never mentioned the GT2030 until just now.

We don't know the performance of the 2200G yet.

The reason people are playing it down is probably due to AMD's presentation, which has the 2400G tied with a GT1030, meaning the 2200G should perform worse.

 

[LTC8K6]

Intel doesnt have anything in the 2200G segment to compete, period.

Where are these independent comparisons of Intel chips and the 2200G?

 

[whm1974]

Where are these independent comparisons of Intel chips and the 2200G?

They will be there after release and the NDAs are lifted.

 

[LTC8K6]

They will be there after release and the NDAs are lifted.

No, I mean the ones everyone is currently using to tell us how the 2200G performs.

 

[whm1974]

No, I mean the ones everyone is currently using to tell us how the 2200G performs.

There aren't any, everyone's just going off AMD's marketing slides....

 

[rainy]

No, I mean the ones everyone is currently using to tell us how the 2200G performs.

In terms of CPU performance it's rather not a mystery: most probably between 1200 and 1300x.
It have higher clocks than first, identical to latter and half L3 of both plus also an improved turbo.

 

[LTC8K6]

In terms of CPU performace it's rather not a mystery: most probably between 1200 and 1300x.
It have higher clocks than first, identical to latter and half L3 of both plus also an improved turbo.

Plus a hot graphics chip under the same hood for TDP calculations.

None of which tells how it will perform against HD630 or GT1030 or whatever.

We will know when we get benchmarks from reviewers.

 

[rainy]

Plus a hot graphics chip under the same hood for TDP calculations.

Maybe you have missed that, Raven Ridge don't have Vega 64/56 inside, it's much smaller version./s

 

[dark zero]

I don't recall anyone, who said that Raven Ridge is best thing ever, however it would be definitely best APU made by AMD.

Actually Raven is the best APU made by AMD and adding HBM or edRAM it would be a beast.

And HD630.? No one would bench it... Even the GPU on the nVIDIA Xavier SOC would wipe the floor with them.

And if they continue like that, even Power VR would defeat them...

 

[whm1974]

Actually Raven is the best APU made by AMD and adding HBM or edRAM it would be a beast.

And HD630.? No one would bench it... Even the GPU on the nVIDIA Xavier SOC would wipe the floor with them.

And if they continue like that, even Power VR would defeat them...

I think Intel only cares if their iGPUs are good enough. As far they are concern, anyone who wants better GPU performance can just buy a video card.

 

[dark zero]

Intel is like Mediatek in the GPU department... As long is OK, they don't care about the competition.