AMD Ryzen 5 2400G review
Click here to post a comment for AMD Ryzen 5 2400G review on our message forum
Whiplashwang
Great review Hilbert!
Did anyone see this yet? https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-raven-ridge-overclocking
I thought it was just the Ryzen sleep bug, but look at his benchmarks! Does anyone have any idea how this is possible? Unless the author is lying, which is possible, but I don't understand why he would when it would affect the rep of pcgamesn.
D3M1G0D
Picolete
About the temepratures,
Could it be that this CPU has the same thing that Ryzen had on release, that reported 20ΒΊC above the real temperature?
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
Some initial DOTA 2 results have been added to both articles.
Embra
Thank you HH. Great review! Looks pretty good.
aKiss
I have asked this question in autumn last year, i know financially it made no point, but now looking at the GPU prices and knowing the limits of the socket AM4, AMD cannot add more vega cores on ryzen, but they can on threadripper. why not add 23 cores, like intel has on their ultrabook cpus but on separate silicone. AMD can do this on the TR4 socketed cpu, as it is so massive, they can do kinda like they did on ryzen, sacrifice half of cores, to add vega cores, basically replacing CCX cores with vega CUs. Of course being threadripper they actually can do this with an entire die, since they are 4 of them, it will not be a threadripper anymore, since it loses many cores by sacrificing a die, but it will be... a Frankenstein monster, just because...
I know that the cheapest threadripper only has 2 dies, so why not only have one die for CPU and the other for vega CUs? Based on the next image, a threadripper die has 8 cores:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1600/images/dieshot.jpg
We know that threadripper is basically 2 functional dies with 16 cores, the rest are dummy dies only used on epyc cpus. A ryzen CPU has the same layout and ony the top 1800x has all the cores available.
This is the ryzen 5 2400g die, notice how it only has 1 CCX those are the names of the core complex from the left and right sides of the image above by the way:
https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/smart/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fjasonevangelho%2Ffiles%2F2018%2F02%2FScreen-Shot-2018-02-11-at-4.45.26-PM-1200x729.jpg%3Fwidth%3D960
My question is this: Why doesn't AMD add 2 vega cores on the remaining 2 dummy dies on threadripper for a total of 11x2 = 22 vega CUs
Will there be a problem with the infinity fabric communication between the 2 vega CU dies and the 2 ryzen dies?
They can have 8 ryzen cores, with no hyper threading i think it would be overkill on 2 dies and 22 vega CU on the other 2 dies.
How much would it cost? 800$ the same as intel's full NUC? Maybe more? Maybe technically and financially it makes no sense? Maybe the TDP will be close to 200 W ?
Am i crazy for thinking about this? AMD sure could have do it if it was possible, maybe i am exaggerating on what is technically possible and especially, financially possible.
Nintendork
Why even bother to OC the cpu when pretty much no one cares about that on a APU? Specially with 3.6-3.9Ghz clocks. It's still the same 14nm LPP "LOW POWER PERFORMANCE", so 4Ghz are a no-no unless you get a golden chip (like the latest batches of Ryzen).
Want to OC Ryzen CPU, wait for the 12nm LP "LEADING PERFORMANCE" (meant for 4Ghz+ frequencies without losing efficiency or nasty voltages) Ryzen+ in April where all the 2000's based on 12nm will get a 300-400Mhz boost on the base clocks with the same TDP and power consumption..
OC the igpu, the thing that everyone wants and cares about an APU.
AMD claimed 1600Mhz+ OC, so technically it could be in between GT1030/GT1050
From all tests it seems the 2400G is kind of BW starved vs the 2200G even with 3200 CL14, I would do a later update with the fastest memory RR can support (maybe DDR4 3600 CL15 or DDR4 4066 CL18).
I just hope that with the 7nm next year and so much space assuming 4c/8t for the cpu part we get 1024SP (16CU's) based on Navi and 2GB HBM2 for a "3400G" or "3400GX"
aKiss
Nintendork
Nintendork
Noisiv
Nintendork
GT1030 is till a dgpu and tons and i mean tons of people play on GT1030/RX550 adjusting datails, even more know on the mining craze where the 1050ti/RX560 are reaching $200+.
It's basically getting $90 worth of dgpu + an i7 7700 for $80 with cpu/apu upgrades till 2020 on the same mobo you buy now.
You can pretty much game at any current game at 1080p low or 900 medium. Remember, there are lots of useless graphic options that barely adds visual eye candy while on the other hand makes the fps tank.
For example on many 2017 games where you need to look a few mins on to an image capture (not even gaming) to spot the differences between high and veryhigh, meanwhile the fps dips to like 40% just to say "i got this gpu to play everything MAXXXXXXXXX", barely notices anything different)
aKiss
Noisiv
Steam Stats. Yeah I know that Steam stats are not perfect, and GT 1030 owners are less likely to be Steam users than the rest of higher end bunch, but we are talking about gaming population. And it's a data point.
Check this data point: Revenue vise, OEM + IP business is 10x smaller than Gaming (GeForce) business. And one would expect that volume vise GT 1030 is heavily over-represented in OEM business.
So no, I doubt they sell tons of 1030.
IMHO its one of those myths... And this one about low-level GPUs outselling everything else, ran out few years ago.
If that was true, NV would be hurting all these years with Intel and AMD IGPs freely chewing lower end, and we dont see that happening. There could be some hurting in Mobile this time around, but they guided well the next quarer so...we'll see.
Yeah I get that with adjusting level of details π
Funny thing is... GT 1030 barely exists on D3M1G0D
Picolete
If you compare the results to the A10, this is an insane upgrade, many people use APU.
It's the R3 2000 it's really good for office PCs
Noisiv
@D3M1G0D
You need to bring that up to those who advocated for 720p gaming π
And frankly I doubt more than 2 ppl argued in the sense of actually playing at 720p. More likely is that they argued that 720p benchmarks are indicative of CPU gaming performance.
I was contemplating about getting 2400G and upgrading to Ryzen+ down the road. For a second or two π
Then I remembered that I still wouldn't be able to play ARMA 3 at 60fps+(and, and proly same for PUBG, and everything else already runs great, so...
SAME HERE :P
If Ryzen 7 had this IGP, I would have said to hell with ARMA 3 and bought it,
Fox2232
eddieobscurant
I was expecting overclocking of the graphics part too. Even amd put out some benchmarks with gpu and memory overclocking
Nintendork