Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday February 13 2018, @12:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the loads-of-power dept.

AMD has launched two desktop APUs with Ryzen CPU cores and Vega graphics. The $169 Ryzen 5 2400G is a 4 core, 8 thread APU with 11 graphics compute units. The $99 Ryzen 3 2200G has 4 cores, 4 threads, and 8 graphics compute units. Both have a 65 W TDP and support dual-channel DDR4-2933 RAM:

Despite the Ryzen 5 2400G being classified as a 'Ryzen 5', the specifications of the chip are pretty much the peak specifications that the silicon is expected to offer. AMD has stated that at this time no Ryzen 7 equivalent is planned. The Ryzen 5 2400G has a full complement of four cores with simultaneous multi-threading, and a full set of 11 compute units on the integrated graphics. This is one compute unit more than the Ryzen 7 2700U Mobile processor, which only has 10 compute units but is limited to 15W TDP. The 11 compute units for the 2400G translates as 704 streaming processors, compared to 640 SPs on the Ryzen 7 2700U or 512 SPs on previous generation desktop APUs: an effective automatic 25% increase from generation to generation of desktop APU without factoring the Vega architecture or the frequency improvements.

The integrated graphics frequency will default to 1250 MHz and the total chip TDP is 65W. Maximum supported memory frequency will vary depending on how much memory is used and what type, but AMD lists DDR4-2933 as the support for one single-sided module per channel. Aside from the full set of hardware, the CPU frequency of the 2400G is very high, similar to the standard Ryzen 7 desktop processors: a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and a turbo of 3.9 GHz will leave little room for overclocking. (Yes, that means these chips are overclockable.)

The Ryzen 5 2400G somewhat replaces the Ryzen 5 1400 at the $169 price point. Both chips will continue to be sold, but at this price point AMD will be promoting the 2400G over the 1400. The 2400G has a higher set of frequencies (3.6G vs 3.2G base frequency, 3.9G vs 3.4G turbo frequency), higher memory support (DDR4-2933 vs DDR4-2666), no cross-CCX latency between sets of cores, but has less L3 cache per core (1 MB vs 2 MB). In virtually all scenarios, even if a user does not use the Ryzen 5 2400G integrated graphics, the Ryzen 5 2400G seems the better option on paper.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Tuesday February 13 2018, @12:25PM

    by bobthecimmerian (6834) on Tuesday February 13 2018, @12:25PM (#637072)

    Tom's Hardware and pcper.com did a pretty thorough review, and for value-for-your-dollar these parts are pretty good. But an Nvidia GT 1030 isn't hard to find these days and beats or matches the better part at the GPU level. So if you're thinking long term get a dedicated CPU and that, and then later swap out the GT 1030 for something better.

    I read about it out of curiosity - my wife's desktop runs one of the older AMD CPU/GPU ('APU') parts and is just fine for what she does with it and Minecraft for the kids. I lost interest in gaming in my late 30s, though, so this part doesn't matter much to me. I'd rather get a Ryzen 7 and some bottom end GPU.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2