Crucial X8 1TB Portable SSD review
Corsair iCUE LS100 Monitor Back Lighting Kit Review
Fractal Design ION+ Platinum 660 and 860W PSU review
Silverstone Permafrost PF240 liquid cooler review
Intel Core i9 9900KS processor review
AMD Ryzen 9 3950X review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
ASUS PRIME X570 Pro review
ASUS ROG STRIX Scope keyboard review
GALAX GeForce RTX 2070 Super WTF review
Review: MSI B350M Gaming Pro with Ryzen 5 2400G
We review the MSI B350M Gaming Pro, with the release of Vega based desktop APUs (Raven Ridge) from AMD, it is interesting to peek at the low-cost b350 chipset based motherboard, in this review, we pair the €77,- / 69 USD MSI motherboard with a Ryzen 5 2400G and take it out for a spin.
Read the full review here.
Review: G.Skill Sniper-X DDR4 3600 MHz (16GB Dual Channel) - 03/13/2018 11:18 AM
G.Skill recently released their Sniper-X DDR4 memory. Available in many designs, frequencies, and latencies. We test the 3600 MHz dual-channel kit, it's cool and runs XMP 2.0 memory profiles on Intel...
Review: DeepCool QuadStellar PC Chassis - 03/13/2018 07:44 AM
We take a look at what might be the most fascinating chassis of 2018, the new DeepCool Quad Stellar. A chassis that will follow up the TriStellar, this round with four compartments and a WIFI controll...
Review: Galax/KFA2 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti EXOC - 03/07/2018 08:28 AM
We review the cooled GALAX/KFA2 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti EXOC, the graphics cards comes in an all-white design, the two fans and cooling radiator make sure that this budget-minded cards never reach 60 Degr...
Review: Corsair Carbide 275R PC Chassis - 03/06/2018 03:00 PM
Today we put the new Carbide 275R chassis though our testing paced for a review here at Guru3D. The 275R (and cases like it) aim to continue the more recent push toward more compact, less space heavy ...
Benchmark review: Final Fantasy XV for Windows PC (Updated) - 03/06/2018 08:39 AM
We check out and benchmark the PC version of Final Fantasy XV / 15 (2018) for Windows relative towards graphics card performance with the latest AMD/NVIDIA graphics card drivers. Multiple graphics car...
SpajdrEX
Senior Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: 2006-05-07
Senior Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: 2006-05-07
#5528401 Posted on: 03/15/2018 10:23 AM
Overclocking the iGPU seems to give quite a big performance boost (~10-15%). Also, it's going to be interesting to see what 4/8GB of memory can do for the performance.
Has anyone tried running it in tandem with a big Vega? Would be interesting to see if they can work together.
I don't think we can expect more then 2GB allocated for VRAM, tha'ts max in all bioses from what i know.
If you want to run this with Vega, you can't use Adrenalin driver, it needs to be driver for RX Vega 8/11.
Already waiting for over one month for Adrenalin driver.
Overclocking the iGPU seems to give quite a big performance boost (~10-15%). Also, it's going to be interesting to see what 4/8GB of memory can do for the performance.
Has anyone tried running it in tandem with a big Vega? Would be interesting to see if they can work together.
I don't think we can expect more then 2GB allocated for VRAM, tha'ts max in all bioses from what i know.
If you want to run this with Vega, you can't use Adrenalin driver, it needs to be driver for RX Vega 8/11.
Already waiting for over one month for Adrenalin driver.
Vananovion
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
#5528439 Posted on: 03/15/2018 01:11 PM
I don't think we can expect more then 2GB allocated for VRAM, tha'ts max in all bioses from what i know.
If you want to run this with Vega, you can't use Adrenalin driver, it needs to be driver for RX Vega 8/11.
Already waiting for over one month for Adrenalin driver.
I was referring to this remark in the conclusion - "Upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB."
Hilbert wouldn't lie to us right?
Bummer about the drivers though.
I don't think we can expect more then 2GB allocated for VRAM, tha'ts max in all bioses from what i know.
If you want to run this with Vega, you can't use Adrenalin driver, it needs to be driver for RX Vega 8/11.
Already waiting for over one month for Adrenalin driver.
I was referring to this remark in the conclusion - "Upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB."
Hilbert wouldn't lie to us right?
Bummer about the drivers though.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36344
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36344
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5528440 Posted on: 03/15/2018 01:28 PM
I was referring to this remark in the conclusion - "Upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB."
Hilbert wouldn't lie to us right?
Bummer about the drivers though.
At the time of the 2000G reviews this was communicated by AMD:
UMA Size, the BIOS will default to 1GB Frame buffer / UMA Size.
i. MSI BIOS: go to Settings / Advanced / Integrated Graphics Config and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Force” and “UMA Frame Buffer Size” to 2GB
ii. Gigabyte BIOS: Go to Chipset and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Forces”, UMA Mode to UMA Specified and UMA Frame buffer size to 2GB
iii. upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB
I was referring to this remark in the conclusion - "Upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB."
Hilbert wouldn't lie to us right?
Bummer about the drivers though.
At the time of the 2000G reviews this was communicated by AMD:
UMA Size, the BIOS will default to 1GB Frame buffer / UMA Size.
i. MSI BIOS: go to Settings / Advanced / Integrated Graphics Config and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Force” and “UMA Frame Buffer Size” to 2GB
ii. Gigabyte BIOS: Go to Chipset and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Forces”, UMA Mode to UMA Specified and UMA Frame buffer size to 2GB
iii. upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB
Warrax
Senior Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 2007-01-08
Senior Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 2007-01-08
#5528466 Posted on: 03/15/2018 03:10 PM
The iGPU performance is really impressive, good job AMD!
The iGPU performance is really impressive, good job AMD!
Vananovion
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
#5528475 Posted on: 03/15/2018 03:30 PM
Thanks boss, good to know it's official.
Thanks boss, good to know it's official.
SpajdrEX
Senior Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: 2006-05-07
Senior Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: 2006-05-07
#5528478 Posted on: 03/15/2018 03:41 PM
At the time of the 2000G reviews this was communicated by AMD:
UMA Size, the BIOS will default to 1GB Frame buffer / UMA Size.
i. MSI BIOS: go to Settings / Advanced / Integrated Graphics Config and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Force” and “UMA Frame Buffer Size” to 2GB
ii. Gigabyte BIOS: Go to Chipset and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Forces”, UMA Mode to UMA Specified and UMA Frame buffer size to 2GB
iii. upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB
That's good news, thanks Hilbert.
At the time of the 2000G reviews this was communicated by AMD:
UMA Size, the BIOS will default to 1GB Frame buffer / UMA Size.
i. MSI BIOS: go to Settings / Advanced / Integrated Graphics Config and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Force” and “UMA Frame Buffer Size” to 2GB
ii. Gigabyte BIOS: Go to Chipset and set “Integrated Graphics” to “Forces”, UMA Mode to UMA Specified and UMA Frame buffer size to 2GB
iii. upcoming BIOS versions will support even larger options such as 4GB and 8GB
That's good news, thanks Hilbert.
Jagman
Senior Member
Posts: 2220
Joined: 2005-03-26
Senior Member
Posts: 2220
Joined: 2005-03-26
#5528494 Posted on: 03/15/2018 04:06 PM
Nice to see a review on this motherboard. I've had one for about 10 months now, BIOS needed work but after updating it stabilized and has got a bit better with each update since. Fingers crossed it continues that way
Nice to see a review on this motherboard. I've had one for about 10 months now, BIOS needed work but after updating it stabilized and has got a bit better with each update since. Fingers crossed it continues that way
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 2010-05-26
Senior Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 2010-05-26
#5528617 Posted on: 03/15/2018 08:56 PM
I said 2018 would be the year APU's could potentially run games @1080p 60 fps. Not quite there yet but we still have 9months of 2018 left. I'm guessing the next iGPU version will handle it just fine.
I said 2018 would be the year APU's could potentially run games @1080p 60 fps. Not quite there yet but we still have 9months of 2018 left. I'm guessing the next iGPU version will handle it just fine.
Dimitrios1983
Senior Member
Posts: 228
Joined: 2018-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 228
Joined: 2018-03-01
#5528637 Posted on: 03/15/2018 10:26 PM
The way the market is going I may just stop buying video cards and pop in a APU every few years and game at Medium/High settings.
The way the market is going I may just stop buying video cards and pop in a APU every few years and game at Medium/High settings.
Reddoguk
Senior Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 2010-05-26
Senior Member
Posts: 1745
Joined: 2010-05-26
#5528663 Posted on: 03/16/2018 01:09 AM
I turn all my game settings to low usually anyway for online games. I see a lot of pros doing it even though they have 10,000 $ machines.
Once APU's have doubled up on GPU performance and they allow more ram/faster ram then i see no reason for a dedicated GPU. You'd probably cut energy bills in half as well for a bonus. I can imagine a sweet 8 core APU with twice the GPU power of the 2400G and 8gb of DDR4/5 3200+ for a buffer.
I turn all my game settings to low usually anyway for online games. I see a lot of pros doing it even though they have 10,000 $ machines.
Once APU's have doubled up on GPU performance and they allow more ram/faster ram then i see no reason for a dedicated GPU. You'd probably cut energy bills in half as well for a bonus. I can imagine a sweet 8 core APU with twice the GPU power of the 2400G and 8gb of DDR4/5 3200+ for a buffer.
AcidSnow
Senior Member
Posts: 414
Joined: 2013-08-09
Senior Member
Posts: 414
Joined: 2013-08-09
#5528681 Posted on: 03/16/2018 03:13 AM
The memory allocation part does NOT improve performance at all... Allocating 2GB, or 256KB makes no performance difference of the graphics APU. What it does do is set a limit on memory available to the rest of the system.
TLDR: There is no performance benefit achieved by giving 2GB to the APU in the BIOS. Doing this actually restricts memory to the rest of the PC, and is bad.
The memory allocation part does NOT improve performance at all... Allocating 2GB, or 256KB makes no performance difference of the graphics APU. What it does do is set a limit on memory available to the rest of the system.
TLDR: There is no performance benefit achieved by giving 2GB to the APU in the BIOS. Doing this actually restricts memory to the rest of the PC, and is bad.
storm83
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: 2018-02-08
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: 2018-02-08
#5528736 Posted on: 03/16/2018 10:49 AM
looking at the performance put out by the current set of APU's, i think i will start saving up for the next gen.
i have mostly stopped buying AAA titles anyway, and have gone the route of casual indy and emulation - and i suspect that with the next gen, the gpu part will be more than capable for my needs...
ITX box, here i come!
looking at the performance put out by the current set of APU's, i think i will start saving up for the next gen.
i have mostly stopped buying AAA titles anyway, and have gone the route of casual indy and emulation - and i suspect that with the next gen, the gpu part will be more than capable for my needs...
ITX box, here i come!
Vananovion
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
#5528743 Posted on: 03/16/2018 12:13 PM
The memory allocation part does NOT improve performance at all... Allocating 2GB, or 256KB makes no performance difference of the graphics APU. What it does do is set a limit on memory available to the rest of the system.
TLDR: There is no performance benefit achieved by giving 2GB to the APU in the BIOS. Doing this actually restricts memory to the rest of the PC, and is bad.
This is false. If you check for example JayzTwoCents review, it is clear that changing the memory allocated to the iGPU has a huge performance impact - performance almost doubles after changing the default 512MB to 2GB.
Also, I don't think it is bad for the system given that the most common memory size is currently 8GB. Dedicating 2 or 4GB out of 8GB to iGPU won't have any performance impact on your system (unless you're doing something memory intensive, in which case - why did you get an APU?). This may have been a problem back in the day, where 128-256MB RAM was the norm, but not today.
The memory allocation part does NOT improve performance at all... Allocating 2GB, or 256KB makes no performance difference of the graphics APU. What it does do is set a limit on memory available to the rest of the system.
TLDR: There is no performance benefit achieved by giving 2GB to the APU in the BIOS. Doing this actually restricts memory to the rest of the PC, and is bad.
This is false. If you check for example JayzTwoCents review, it is clear that changing the memory allocated to the iGPU has a huge performance impact - performance almost doubles after changing the default 512MB to 2GB.
Also, I don't think it is bad for the system given that the most common memory size is currently 8GB. Dedicating 2 or 4GB out of 8GB to iGPU won't have any performance impact on your system (unless you're doing something memory intensive, in which case - why did you get an APU?). This may have been a problem back in the day, where 128-256MB RAM was the norm, but not today.
mamaduxo
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 2015-12-26
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 2015-12-26
#5528749 Posted on: 03/16/2018 12:47 PM
This is false. If you check for example JayzTwoCents review, it is clear that changing the memory allocated to the iGPU has a huge performance impact - performance almost doubles after changing the default 512MB to 2GB.
Also, I don't think it is bad for the system given that the most common memory size is currently 8GB. Dedicating 2 or 4GB out of 8GB to iGPU won't have any performance impact on your system (unless you're doing something memory intensive, in which case - why did you get an APU?). This may have been a problem back in the day, where 128-256MB RAM was the norm, but not today.
A few games read the ammount of VRAM avaiable, but dedicating 512MB or 2GB in bios is the same as igpu can acess all the memory. Also that test by Jay was a mess, and there are some tests that show you shoudn't allocate 2GB if you only have 8GB total ram.
This is false. If you check for example JayzTwoCents review, it is clear that changing the memory allocated to the iGPU has a huge performance impact - performance almost doubles after changing the default 512MB to 2GB.
Also, I don't think it is bad for the system given that the most common memory size is currently 8GB. Dedicating 2 or 4GB out of 8GB to iGPU won't have any performance impact on your system (unless you're doing something memory intensive, in which case - why did you get an APU?). This may have been a problem back in the day, where 128-256MB RAM was the norm, but not today.
A few games read the ammount of VRAM avaiable, but dedicating 512MB or 2GB in bios is the same as igpu can acess all the memory. Also that test by Jay was a mess, and there are some tests that show you shoudn't allocate 2GB if you only have 8GB total ram.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 81
Joined: 2017-08-31
Overclocking the iGPU seems to give quite a big performance boost (~10-15%). Also, it's going to be interesting to see what 4/8GB of memory can do for the performance.
Has anyone tried running it in tandem with a big Vega? Would be interesting to see if they can work together.