If you are going to play Battlefield 1 online,go for a Ryzen 3 2200G at a minimum.
Yeah, sure, if you want to play the most recent AAA titles, you want a beefy dGPU.It's not surprising at all to me. I was trying to make clear how pathetic and unfun gaming on a 1030/Vega APU is.
If you are going to play Battlefield 1 online,go for a Ryzen 3 2200G at a minimum.
At $100/$120 I'm thinking that 4c/4t should be the minimum APU/CPU for Gaming/Basic PCs with 4c/8c APU/CPU given consideration for longer term use.Agreed. I would not want to play BF1 on a dual core. That was probably holding you back more than the 7850.
At $100/$120 I'm thinking that 4c/4t should be the minimum APU/CPU for Gaming/Basic PCs with 4c/8c APU/CPU given consideration for longer term use.
Well in my case back in 2013 when I built my rig, by design it is capable of lasting 10 years if needed. Although I didn't plan on keeping it that long.Sounds about right. I edited my post and it certainly seems to prove this. I have been on 4C/4T for 10 years now that I think about it. About 5 years on a Phenom II and another 5 on this 3570k. If I were building today 4C/8T would be the minimum, though I plan on going 6C/12T with Zen+ later this year. Maybe. If only I had waited a little longer and gotten Haswell with 16GB of DDR4, then I wouldn't have to worry about memory prices
Well in my case back in 2013 when I built my rig, by design it is capable of lasting 10 years if needed. Although I didn't plan on keeping it that long.
Yeah but the 2400G is around half the price of what Intel I7 CPUs normally sold for. Back in 2013 something like this wasn't available for $170.That's a very long time to keep a PC. If Intel didn't play games with sockets I'd gladly put a Skylake or Coffelake i7 in here and be good for many more years. When I built this one in 2013 I had no idea how long I expected it to last. I've upgraded my SSD and video card, otherwise the guts are the same.
As for the OP, I would go with the 2400G. That should be sufficient to last awhile video wise. Prices will adjust one way or another. Production is being increased, and all it takes is a coin crash to find ebay loaded with GPU's way under MSRP. It's happened before. I got a 270X for about half price years ago. Even if that doesn't happen, prices can't go much higher.
Wait until the right time to snag a GPU. In the meantime you will have a rock solid CPU with decent integrated video. I wouldn't advise the 2200G. These days I don't think I'd care for any CPU without SMT. That is probably my biggest regret with the i5 I have. The i7 with it's 4C/8T has aged much better.
Yeah but the 2400G is around half the price of what Intel I7 CPUs normally sold for. Back in 2013 something like this wasn't available for $170.
One thing that I haven't seen tested a lot is the 2200G and 2400G in a setup with a dGPU. Specifically, for me, I'm still on the fence about my situation:
Currently, I have an i5-2400, 16GB of generic DDR3, and an Nvidia NVS 510 (think underclocked GT630 DDR3). The motherboard does not support Ivy Bridge processors.
I am considering paying about $50 to a friend that's got an i7-3770K with a high end motherboard (for the era) as an upgrade for me.
I am also considering just saving more money and getting something newer...
My current thinking is that I'm going to get an 2400G, a decent motherboard, 8GB DDR4 Kit and run that for a while, will eventually invest in a decent dGPU (something in the 1050ti-1070-RX560-570 range), and later will upgrade to 16GB DDR4 and sell off my 8GB kit.
I'm interested in how well the 2400G will perform once it's paired with a passable to decent dGPU. I fairly certain that the 8x PCIe lanes won't be an issue. I'm also fairly certain that, with the iGPU disabled, there will be a reduction in memory bandwidth contention, improving the scores of the CPU portion of the 2400G. I suspect that it will do quite well overall and will be a good long-term investment. As you can see from the CPU that I currently have, I tend to keep my computers for a very long time.
Anyone know of any good reviews of the 2200g/2400g that test it's performance with a dGPU?
For $400 that doesn't sound bad at all.Budget gamerguy......
I can sell you an Asus z170 -A motherboard, 16 gb of gskill ddr4 3000, a gtx 960 4gb, and a i3 6100 @ 3.7 for 400$ shipped mabe less.
Pm me.
If you are going to play Battlefield 1 online,go for a Ryzen 3 2200G at a minimum.
Isn't BF1 one of those games the more cores and threads the merrier?For real, online multiplayer will crush that G4560. Will definitely have to play on small player maps.
Isn't BF1 one of those games the more cores and threads the merrier?
If I was a big BF1 player I would get the 2400G instead of the 2200G, if I couldn't afford the 1600 and a decent dGPU.It is from my experience. I'm not sure how the 2200G would do either, haven't seen any benchmarks. I had to play smaller maps and use lower settings when I had my Q9650 but it was playable. Now with a i7 7700 and gtx 1070, the game ultras everything out and it runs smooth.
If I was a big BF1 player I would get the 2400G instead of the 2200G, if I couldn't afford the 1600 and a decent dGPU.
1. 2200G/2400 now
2. GTX2050 ti / GTX 2060 somwhere in a year, when the prices do come down (or the rumors are correct, that Nvidia blocks Mining on gaming cards etc)
3. Ryzen 3xxx series 6-core somewhere in 2019-2020. (built on the 7nm process, and should reach 5 GHz)