If the 320 ge etc bring 4 x ryzen 2 cores and 8 threads ... They will be THE killer budget deal ! Pretty much will throw all the 2nd hand i7 quad cores over 80 usd under the bus. Give or take.

Its a shame it has the same vega igpu. Some navi variant would be amazing in this apu.

Undying:

Its a shame it has the same vega igpu. Some navi variant would be amazing in this apu.

Those Ryzen 3X00G are 12nm. (Ryzen 2X00G were 14nm.) AMD does not list those GE chips, yet. But from clock to power limit, they look like 12nm too.

It feels kinda misleading that APU parts are a generation behind, but share model number prefix of current gen. They're basically Ryzen 2k series with an iGPU, so slightly higher frequencies, same crappy memory latency. Was really hoping for chiplet design, just shove a vega iGPU on the 2nd chiplet location, and enjoy better memory latency / frequency. massive iGPU performance then since vega is starved for memory bandwidth

Wait so these are G and GE models, but they don't have an iGPU? That's confusing.

GE = graphics exterminated

How come you think the Vega graphics are disabled?

Undying:

Its a shame it has the same vega igpu. Some navi variant would be amazing in this apu.

Yeah but they are going APU's after desktop and server chips so we have to wait for them to get off of 12nm CPU/GPU and move to 7nm. AMD's 7nm Zen2 + Navi should make a hell of an APU.

GeniusPr0:

How come you think the Vega graphics are disabled?

Under the GPU column in the chart, it says "No" for each of the Athlon products. It is worth pointing out the 200 series Athlons do have iGPUs.

JamesSneed:

Yeah but they are going APU's after desktop and server chips so we have to wait for them to get off of 12nm CPU/GPU and move to 7nm. AMD's 7nm Zen2 + Navi should make a hell of an APU.

Considering Intel is catching up, AMD does need a jump in iGPU performance, the sooner the better. It was the one thing in which AMD used to reign supreme due to their (and ATI's) history in the GPU business that Intel lacked.

Kaarme:

Considering Intel is catching up, AMD does need a jump in iGPU performance, the sooner the better. It was the one thing in which AMD used to reign supreme due to their (and ATI's) history in the GPU business that Intel lacked.

There's only that much graphical performance one can extract from GPU at given memory bandwidth. Navi may have 10~15% higher potential than Vega due to better compression and other things. Having up to 50% higher performance per watt is nice as lower TDP devices (ultrabooks) may now catch up to desktops. Bad side of the coin is that Navi has more transistors per building block than Vega. 8CU Navi iGPU is going to be bit smaller and bit faster than 11CU Vega iGPU and may consume less power at same performance. 12CU Navi iGPU is going to be maybe 20% bigger than 11CU Vega iGPU. But it will saturate memory bandwidth and high iGPU clock will not yield desired performance increase. (If useless higher clock is dropped, it will be very power efficient.) From my experience with 2400G, it was almost good entry level gaming chip. 12CU Navi will be good entry level gaming chip (with sufficient memory bandwidth). And that includes notebooks/ultrabooks. = = = = Maybe AMD is working on this issue with bandwidth, maybe they are waiting for DDR5 to solve it for them. Maybe they are waiting till they finish chiplet design for GPUs too. (Would be funny if they made quad channel i/o die for mobile devices with high performance iGPU having 20CUs. But considering that they do not sell that many notebooks...) - - - - I am afraid AMD has to focus to where they know that money will flow towards them most.

Man o Man I never thought I would see Amd come back in such a way and actually give Intel a run for there Money! I will be upgrading soon ( Hopefully) still using an Old Fx-8 core for web-browsing and light gaming ect.... Go Amd!

schmidtbag:

Under the GPU column in the chart, it says "No" for each of the Athlon products. It is worth pointing out the 200 series Athlons do have iGPUs.

Thought G was for graphics and E for energy or efficient Then again 2700U and 3750H dont follow suit

GeniusPr0:

Thought G was for graphics and E for energy or efficient Then again 2700U and 3750H dont follow suit

https://zdnet4.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2017/03/02/1f634c0e-48d2-4536-a3e9-410c46272c02/resize/770xauto/b178be8a09b47137dd0089e3acee9329/2017-03-0218-24-16.jpg

Venix:

If the 320 ge etc bring 4 x ryzen 2 cores and 8 threads ... They will be THE killer budget deal ! Pretty much will throw all the 2nd hand i7 quad cores over 80 usd under the bus. Give or take.

Yes but then it would be Ryzen CPU and not Athlon CPU 🙂 (btw i am amazed each day on how Athlon GE (Zen core) perform for the price)

schmidtbag:

Wait so these are G and GE models, but they don't have an iGPU? That's confusing.

G with graphic GE with graphic but efficiency (low tdp) there is also the not listed here G and GE Pro variant (with security and ECC on demand directely to AMD)

Why is everyone telling me what G means? I know what it means - does nobody understand what my question is? I'm asking why the G[E] Athlon models at the bottom of the list say "No" under the GPU column.

On Asrock leaking it is listed as APU (so with graphic) despite the NO in the column. also they have GE lettering, so i would said that they have graphic. Anyway we will enjoy the sun and check when they will be out