Zen 2 APUs/"Renoir" discussion thread

[LightningZ71]

I agree, the 4300g is significantly behind the 3400g at stock with respect to compute. It will also have considerably better CPU cores and memory bandwidth at stock. My point is that, in overall functionality, there won't be much of a difference between the two chips in practice when gaming, especially at lower resolutions.

If we want to consider overclocking, it is reasonable to assume that the 4300 will be able to run its 6 CUs at 1900mhz or more, whereas the 3200 barely gets much past 1600 in most cases. The difference in compute throughput isn't so great then. Also consider that getting anything past 3200 speeds on the main memory was definitely hit or miss on the 3200, the 4000+ that we're seeing in some leaks is considerably faster than that. If you look at the 3400, you do get a pretty big difference in GPU compute speeds, but it still has the memory bottleneck to deal with.

I don't see where the 3200/3400 are going to be miles better than the 4300, and if you turn up the texture quality, the memory bandwidth difference will really come into play.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I think it is disingenuous to say that the 4300G is the successor to the 3400G. The 4750G is its successor. AMD is raising prices.

 

[moinmoin]

I think it is disingenuous to say that the 4300G is the successor to the 3400G. The 4750G is its successor. AMD is raising prices.

That's like saying the 3950X is the successor to the 1800X/2700X or the 3990X is the successor to the 2990WX (and that one to the 1950X). Sure, they are all each the best in their respective class, but that's where the similarities stop.

 

[Asterox]

I think it is disingenuous to say that the 4300G is the successor to the 3400G. The 4750G is its successor. AMD is raising prices.

Yes it is no doubt, or in one jump(Intel Skylake was lounched in 2015) or generation you will get 15% higher IPC or CPU improvments.Even 35W R3 4350GE, it will have much beeter CPU performance.

 

[Shivansps]

I think it is disingenuous to say that the 4300G is the successor to the 3400G. The 4750G is its successor. AMD is raising prices.

For all intents and purposes, if the 4300G ends up launching at $140, it will be. Now if this is because AMD is rasing prices or some other reason thats another matter.

Now, i dont agree that the successor it is the 4700G, it is the 4600G, the 4700G is to the 3400G what the 3900X is to the 2700X.

 

[grant2]

speaking for myself, and I don't know who else, I'm not interested in tinkering with overclocking to get higher performance out of an APU.

If I need more performance, I will buy higher performance out of the box and run things at spec.

I totally get the fun of overclocking as a hobby, but the hour(s) spent learning and tweaking are worth more than the $50 or $100 it would cost me to buy the faster parts.

 

[DrMrLordX]

That's like saying the 3950X is the successor to the 1800X/2700X or the 3990X is the successor to the 2990WX (and that one to the 1950X). Sure, they are all each the best in their respective class, but that's where the similarities stop.

No it isn't. The 3900x was the fastest CPU that launched in July 2019 as AMD replaced Pinnacle Ridge; ergo, it was the successor to the 2700x.

For all intents and purposes, if the 4300G ends up launching at $140, it will be.

The 3400G is the fastest desktop APU AMD will sell you right now. The 4750G is taking on that role. It's really no more complicated than that. AMD does not want to sell you 8CU at the $140 price point. If you want 8CU to compete with the 11CU of the 3400G, you're paying more money this time around.

If I need more performance, I will buy higher performance out of the box and run things at spec.

It looks like the 4750G PRO can OC to 4.5 GHz or higher, at a price lower than the 3700x. You can't buy that out of the box. Even a 3800XT isn't that fast @ stock.

 

[moinmoin]

No it isn't. The 3900x was the fastest CPU that launched in July 2019 as AMD replaced Pinnacle Ridge; ergo, it was the successor to the 2700x.

And now it's 3950X. But nice deflection, lol.

It's obvious 4300G is seen as a successor of the 3400G specifically based on the core/thread count. There are simply different parameters by which something can be called a comparable equivalent and as such a successor of something else. You just chose to pick a different one, that doesn't automatically make the other ones disingenuous. Like Shivansps for instance liking to focus on there being no true successors available, specifically based on the CU count.

 

[DrMrLordX]

And now it's 3950X.

Well, I guess if you want to make the point that AMD is raising prices on AM4 by moving from the $499 1800x and $499 3900x to the $749 3950X, then point taken. I wasn't going to go there but hey why not? They're basically doing the same thing with the desktop APU lineup anyway.

It's obvious 4300G is seen as a successor of the 3400G specifically based on the core/thread count.

So wait, why are we talking about the 3950X or even the 3900X above if we're shifting to core/thread count parity? Now we have to assume the 3700x or 3800x is the successor to the 2700x and 1800x . . . ?

Look, an APU differentiates itself by graphics. Otherwise 3400G buyers would just get the 3300X and call it a day. Also observe who started this particular line of thinking (@Shivansps ) and ask yourself why anyone is complaining about the 4300G at all? It's clearly going to be the faster CPU . . . but as an APU, with only 6 CU, that is where it falls short versus the 3400G. So what if you want 8CU to (more or less) match the 11CU of the previous generation? Now you will pay more. And you will get more cores and more threads from the CPU whether or not you want it.

 

[LightningZ71]

And, assuming that you can actually find one in the retail channel, you can still purchase the 3400g if you really want 11 CUs and slower CPU cores. AMD isn't going to restrict you to just choosing the 4300g for a while, and at least until supplies of the 3400g dry up. What's more important to you?

I still want to see actual head to head benchmarks between a 3400G and a 4300/4350g at both spec and as overclocked as they can get on "reasonable" cooling methods and with a reasonable budget.

Keep in mind, these CPUs have two use cases: Either they are being put into a tiny case with no PCIe slot for a video card, in which case there isn't a massive amount of cooling space in them, or they are being put into a larger case that has a PCIe slot, in which case, where does it cross the budget line to invest in a massive cooler and super expensive ram to drain every last drop of performance out of either processor? If you're stuck in a tiny case, then your best bet is to get the best RAM that you can afford for either platform, which makes the case where we explore the maximum memory speed capabilities of the 4300 an important one. The flip side there is that, do you go overboard on RAM, or just buy decent 3600 ram and spend the rest to upgrade to the 4500g?

 

[Shivansps]

The 4300G is seem as the successor to the 3400G because it is launching at the same price point, the core or CU count has nothing to do with that.
The real successor is the new Ryzen 5 APU, the 4600G. But it comes with a beefy price increase.
The Ryzen 7 APU is a new product, nothing like that was avalible before.

snipped

Is not about buying the 3400G (and the 3200G because there is nothing at $100) for as long as you can, you need to see the big picture:

-Most of the noticeable CPU gains of the 4300G over the 3400G will be show in games, we are already talking about buying a $140 APU to pair it with a GPU. For any other task, its going to be better, yes, but not by much. And remember that software that benefit from that also benefit from GPU compute, not every software, but a lot of it.

-Shader compute IS used in games, dont ever forget that.

-Zen3 CPUs are coming right behind Renoir, the "cpu gains" of Renoir is not going to last for long, we are going to be right back at buying a APU with inferior CPU power than a CPU soon enoght.

-People that dont need an APU for gaming (lets say office use) are going to be still better off with the 3200G because Renoir has no sku at $100, and once the supplys dry up there is no replacement. And i would think this is the most common use for an APU worldwide.

-For people that use an APU for gaming (The most common use case in my country) Renoir is a letdown, best-case escenario with the 4300G we are talking about matching performance of the 3400G(to me it is unlikely), the other APUs the 4600G and 4700G are too expensive for iGPU gaming and we are still talking about small gains over the 3400G.

-Most of the Renoir gains are for special cases, like the full PCI-E 16x for a GPU, and the memory support, it is welcome, but someone that buys a APU for igp gaming or office use is not going to expend the extra money for expensive memory kits. So most gains are for us, the maybe 5% that overclocks.

So for what people these new APU are intended for? The 4600G and specially the 4700G open new, interesting use cases, but that about it.

 

[VirtualLarry]

are going to be still better off with the 3200G because Renoir has no sku at $100, and once the supplys dry up there is no replacement.

Dali?

I for one, would really appreciate a proper Zen-derived architecture APU, preferably in 7nm, to REPLACE the (relatively awful, but I understand, they are cheap to produce) Stoney Ridge APUs. I've had pretty-much ENOUGH of A4-9120e / A4-9220e to last a lifetime.

 

[moinmoin]

Well, I guess if you want to make the point that AMD is raising prices on AM4 by moving from the $499 1800x and $499 3900x to the $749 3950X, then point taken. I wasn't going to go there but hey why not? They're basically doing the same thing with the desktop APU lineup anyway.

No, you took one parameter (best of class), added another parameter (price) to claim that AMD is rising prices and that saying 4300G is a successor of 3400G is disingenuous. I took a dig at that approach and added a couple more comparisons in that vein. I claim it's obvious the parameter for claiming 4300G is a successor of 3400G is core/thread count. But it seems you don't agree and aren't really recognizing that you are messing with several parameters there.

So wait, why are we talking about the 3950X or even the 3900X above if we're shifting to core/thread count parity? Now we have to assume the 3700x or 3800x is the successor to the 2700x and 1800x . . . ?

The discussion of 4300G being a successor of 3400G started out with the parameter core/thread count. You called it disingenuous by shifting it to best of class. And added the parameter price to it by stating AMD would be thus rising the price. I state you are making a big mess of the discussion by not differentiating between all these parameters and making blanket statements.

Look, an APU differentiates itself by graphics. Otherwise 3400G buyers would just get the 3300X and call it a day. Also observe who started this particular line of thinking (@Shivansps ) and ask yourself why anyone is complaining about the 4300G at all? It's clearly going to be the faster CPU . . . but as an APU, with only 6 CU, that is where it falls short versus the 3400G. So what if you want 8CU to (more or less) match the 11CU of the previous generation? Now you will pay more. And you will get more cores and more threads from the CPU whether or not you want it.

This is purely about the parameter CU count. Which is honestly inane to me.

Firstly, we don't know yet how the parameter compute performance will look. We don't know yet what the actual compute performance/price ratio will be when using OC and the best possible memory. Before that is known and can actually be discussed, continuously complaining about the number of CUs, however disappointing, is just tiring and going nowhere.

Secondly, any modern low level dGPU quickly passes any iGPU anyway. Claiming APUs have to offer peak graphics performance (which in the context of dGPUs they will never be able to) misses the bigger picture that the reason for APUs' existence is not that but offering graphics at all, to offer a balanced complete package for mobile and low power systems. On desktop these offers can be exploited, with thermal and power limits essentially removed. But that doesn't make them designed to beat the dGPUs.

 

[Asterox]

The 4300G is seem as the successor to the 3400G because it is launching at the same price point, the core or CU count has nothing to do with that.
The real successor is the new Ryzen 5 APU, the 4600G. But it comes with a beefy price increase.
The Ryzen 7 APU is a new product, nothing like that was avalible before.



Is not about buying the 3400G (and the 3200G because there is nothing at $100) for as long as you can, you need to see the big picture:

-Most of the noticeable CPU gains of the 4300G over the 3400G will be show in games, we are already talking about buying a $140 APU to pair it with a GPU. For any other task, its going to be better, yes, but not by much. And remember that software that benefit from that also benefit from GPU compute, not every software, but a lot of it.

-Shader compute IS used in games, dont ever forget that.

-Zen3 CPUs are coming right behind Renoir, the "cpu gains" of Renoir is not going to last for long, we are going to be right back at buying a APU with inferior CPU power than a CPU soon enoght.

-People that dont need an APU for gaming (lets say office use) are going to be still better off with the 3200G because Renoir has no sku at $100, and once the supplys dry up there is no replacement. And i would think this is the most common use for an APU worldwide.

-For people that use an APU for gaming (The most common use case in my country) Renoir is a letdown, best-case escenario with the 4300G we are talking about matching performance of the 3400G(to me it is unlikely), the other APUs the 4600G and 4700G are too expensive for iGPU gaming and we are still talking about small gains over the 3400G.

-Most of the Renoir gains are for special cases, like the full PCI-E 16x for a GPU, and the memory support, it is welcome, but someone that buys a APU for igp gaming or office use is not going to expend the extra money for expensive memory kits. So most gains are for us, the maybe 5% that overclocks.

So for what people these new APU are intended for? The 4600G and specially the 4700G open new, interesting use cases, but that about it.

Wait for test comparison, and you will see why R3 3300X makes no any sense vs R3 4530GE.

Except the price diference, same comparison goes for R5 3600 vs Ryzen 5 Pro 4650GE 35W.

Discrete GPU Gaming performance will be very small.You have iGPU, and that could be very useful on multiple levels, or for very good low power HTPC configuration.

A lot of people needs or wants strong CPU performanse for HTPC PC.Old R5 3400G is just not good enough.

Ryzen 5 Pro 4650GE 35W, it will be a great or ideal choice for HTPC usage.

As i said before, "for my usage scenario(PC conected to 4K TV=for me it is just a big screen, a dont care about TV Free DVB-T programes) 35W R3 4530GE is shut up and take my money".

 

[RTX2080]

Seems lowest sku is 4300g? I just do want an Athlon 4000G which is 4C4T and price at current 3200G or lower *shrug*

 

[Shivansps]

Seems lowest sku is 4300g? I just do want an Athlon 4000G which is 4C4T and price at current 3200G or lower *shrug*

That may be exactly what gona happen. Something like a 4/4 or 4/8 with 2CU RDNA2 if the rumor of the first RDNA2 apu to be Dali replacement is true.

Dali?

I for one, would really appreciate a proper Zen-derived architecture APU, preferably in 7nm, to REPLACE the (relatively awful, but I understand, they are cheap to produce) Stoney Ridge APUs. I've had pretty-much ENOUGH of A4-9120e / A4-9220e to last a lifetime.

Same as abode, there is a rumor that the first RDNA2 APU is Dali replacement coming early in 2021.

 

[LightningZ71]

Exactly, you will have Dali (Athlong 4000g maybe?) to cover the bottom end of: general office use, Home Theater PC with NO gaming, etc. It will easily be able to outpace anything 3000g used to do, and, in most CPU use cases, it'll likely also be faster than the 3200g. If you want something better, you're going to either have to hope that there's an athlon 4100/4200 with maybe higher clocks for the iGPU and cores. That's not without precedent at AMD, remember the Athlon 200/220/240?

For the Renoir Desktop parts, I think that you're looking at it through the wrong lens. AMD isn't interested in competing against itself. Instead, they're looking at what Intel will be producing to compete against them. You've got comet lake with the i3 at 4/8 with UHD 610. The 4300/4350g should easily handle that with 6CU. Above that, you've got the i5 and up with UHD 630, which the 4500 and 4700 chips should be able to match in CPU and beat in iGPU. There's also going to be the issue of the possibility of uSFF desktops being made with mobile processors from the Ice Lake generation. 4300 can handle i3 and i5 processors with G1 and G4 series iGPUs. 4500 can handle i5 processors with G4 and likely handle G7 equipped models. The 4700s should be able to beat any of the i7 desktops with G7.

So, from that perspective, both their pricing and lineup make sense. And, again, at OEM spec configurations, the 4300/4350 won't have any issues with keeping up with or beating the 3400g/pro in 99% of what it's asked to do. If you're solely looking at the enthusiast market, then a lot of different variables come into play. If you're just going to purchase 3200CL16 DDR4 sticks and do no other overclocking, then I think you'll find that the 3400g games better in non-cpu bound situations. Bring any games up that hit the CPU hard, and the situation will likely be different. Get a couple of 3600CL16 DDR4 sticks, which aren't crazy expensive at all, and overclock them to 4000, which, again, isn't crazy, and you'll likely see that there's hardly any gap that you're going to notice, and you'll likely be able to run higher texture quality on the 4300 than the 3400g to boot.

 

[Shivansps]

Dali is another Raven2 APU, they are gona keep using it for botton-line Athlons for some time. Regardless of what they are calling it, it is the same 2C/4T Raven Ridge with Vega 3 at 14nm. At $50 it is good.

But the newerest rumor point out that Van Gogh is Dali replacement and the first RDNA APU, and we know that Cézanne is still Vega... at first i trought "Why?" why will the first RDNA2 APU be a small APU and launching early next year? Well now with these Renoir prices all makes sence... Van Gogh may take the 3200G place at $100.

 

[nicalandia]

I think it is disingenuous to say that the 4300G is the successor to the 3400G. The 4750G is its successor. AMD is raising prices.

The 3400G is 4 core processor and the 4750G is a 8C/16T, you are being an innocent if you believe Amd will give it a 4C/8T price for this CPU

 

[maddie]

The 3400G is 4 core processor and the 4750G is a 8C/16T, you are being an innocent if you believe Amd will give it a 4C/8T price for this CPU

210mm^2 (3400G) versus 150mm^2 (4750G) die. Have we abandoned the expectation that performance will rise each generation at similar prices?

 

[nicalandia]

Have we abandoned the expectation that performance will rise each generation at similar prices?

On what world does the 4300G has less performance with a higher price compared to the 3400G? Actually it has a 15% IPC performance increase over the 3400G with the same price tag. But guys like you and DrMrLordX want over 100% performance increase(4C/8T Zen+ vs 8C/16T Zen2) for the same price? Yeah give me and everybody here a break if it were for Intel you would be getting a 2C/4T APU with 5% IPC increase requiring a new Motherboard

 

[Shivansps]

On what world the 4300G has less performance with a higher price compared to the 3400G? Actually it has a 15% IPC performance increase over the 3400G with the same price tag. But guys like you and DrMrLordX want over 100% performance increase(4C/8T Zen+ vs 8C/16T Zen2) for the same price? Yeah give me and everybody here a break if it were for Intel you would be getting a 2C/4T APU with 5% IPC increase.

Not even Intel replaced an I5 with a I3 at the same price and call it an improvement. Please stop.

210mm^2 (3400G) versus 150mm^2 (4750G) die. Have we abandoned the expectation that performance will rise each generation at similar prices?

Asking a 8C APU at 140 is 100% unreal, but the 6C one should have been around $150 as the true replacement to the 3400G.

 

[nicalandia]

Not even Intel replaced an I5 with a I3 at the same price and call it an improvement. Please stop.

But guys like you want a R7 with a price of an R5? Yeah right. I say Amd have spoiled your kind too much, remember when 8C/16T were 1K a pop? Now Amd out of their kindess has given Peasants 8C/16T CPUs for $300 and the same Peasants now want those CPUs for $140.00 just because they feel entitled. I mean Really?

 

[maddie]

On what world does the 4300G has less performance with a higher price compared to the 3400G? Actually it has a 15% IPC performance increase over the 3400G with the same price tag. But guys like you and DrMrLordX want over 100% performance increase(4C/8T Zen+ vs 8C/16T Zen2) for the same price? Yeah give me and everybody here a break if it were for Intel you would be getting a 2C/4T APU with 5% IPC increase requiring a new Motherboard

I meant that we should expect to pay roughly the same price for a higher performing part as newer generations replace the old. I can't see how It is understood that I am claiming the 4300G is less than the 3400G.

I simply said that a 155mm^2 part is replacing a 210mm^2 part and we will be paying close to 2X the price. How many cores they manage to fit is part of the equation of giving more for the same price as technologies advance.

What we see here is close to if not more than a tripling of margins on the top APU. All of the arguments to make me feel as a special sucker is futile, so hell no.

What Intel does is irrelevant. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

 

[leoneazzurro]

150 mm^2 are on a much more expensive process, it was rumored that 7nm wafers cost almost double of the cost of 12nm wafers, and development costs on smaller geometries are higher, too. Moreover the comparison is between launch cost of a new product (not even yet official) with the cost of another product that is EOL. We should look at the situation a couple of months after launch (of the retail parts, as the first APUs seems to be destined to the OEM market, according to the rumors).